UK MP speech about freedoms censored by YouTube

Post by pydry » Thu, Oct 14, 2021, 10:41 AM UTC

zpeti wrote: post #27

dua2020 wrote: post #5

This is a government which is in the process of criminalising protest under a deliberately vague 'public nuisance' clause. They only want freedom of expression for their views and not for those that oppose them.

Can someone explain to me how this makes sense when they are letting insulate britain block motorways? Like which protests are they trying to stop? I assume blocking motorways is illegal already, yet the police are doing nothing, which is leading dangerously to vigilante justice as per some videos, which is only a question of time before it turns really violent. Wtf is the UK government doing? Why do they need more p…

Post by Stevvo » Thu, Oct 14, 2021, 10:45 AM UTC

PontifexMinimus wrote: post #17

basisword wrote: post #9

"Freedom is the reason the UK has had such a long an illustrious history." I'm sure the inhabitants of the many countries the British invaded and continue to hang on to would disagree. The Online Safety Bill he mentions in his outrage at YouTube taking down his speech is itself an attack on freedoms. He's also part of a political party working to criminalise protests they disagree with.

> British invaded and continue to hang on to The only places I can think of that Britain currently "hangs on to" against the will of the inhabitants are arguably Scotland and Northern Ireland, but in both those places about half the population want to continue to belong to the UK. So it's not obvious to me who you're referring to here.

Post by TrispusAttucks » Thu, Oct 14, 2021, 10:51 AM UTC

basisword wrote: post #32

PontifexMinimus wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> British invaded and continue to hang on to The only places I can think of that Britain currently "hangs on to" against the will of the inhabitants are arguably Scotland and Northern Ireland, but in both those places about half the population want to continue to belong to the UK. So it's not obvious to me who you're referring to here.

Badly phrased. I meant inhabitants of all current and ex-colonies. Not just the remaining ones. Although, the talk of blocking another Scottish independence referendum could certainly be used as evidence of holding on to a country against the inhabitants will. You can't know their will if you prevent them from expressing it. Yes, they expressed it 7 years ago but a lot has changed since then, most notably leaving the…

Post by basisword » Thu, Oct 14, 2021, 10:57 AM UTC

TrispusAttucks wrote: post #45

basisword wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Badly phrased. I meant inhabitants of all current and ex-colonies. Not just the remaining ones. Although, the talk of blocking another Scottish independence referendum could certainly be used as evidence of holding on to a country against the inhabitants will. You can't know their will if you prevent them from expressing it. Yes, they expressed it 7 years ago but a lot has changed since then, most notably leaving the…

Regarding ex-colonies: Don't we have to eventually "let bygones be bygones"? Otherwise, where do we draw the line? How far do we go back? Those original human perpetrators are long dead. "Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin." ~ Deuteronomy 24:16

Post by protomyth » Thu, Oct 14, 2021, 10:57 AM UTC

ColinHayhurst wrote: post #2

The video has now been restored: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VidUXZjzNVk Worth a watch. Should we "assume the best" by assuming this was taken down by AI, and without human check? MP says: “This is an outrageous attack on free speech. Throughout the pandemic we've seen blatant attempts by Big Tech to silence opposition voices challenging the conventional wisdom. This episode serves as a further example of the wor…