user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
I do believe in freedom of speech.Therefor I believe everybody is entitled to expressing his or her opinion no matter how stupid or crazy it might be.I'm part Japanese so naturally I get offended when I see the anti Japanese ballots or comments on this site.But I also think it's wrong to kick them out because they are racists.Nobody is predudice free.But they need to know that they are predudiced so that their opinion are biased.The real danger is that a lot of racists believe their twisted opinions are the truth.Like many people on this site believe Jews are the evil ones,which is far from the truth.The Truth id middle east situation is so complicated that you just can't simply say "Jews are the opressors,poor Arabs".Nobody knows what is going on really.
We might find out 60 years from now on
Rubbish. If nobody really knows what is going on now, why should anyone know 60 years later? The Arabs are oppressed in Palestine. They are oppressed by Israel. They are resisting occupation.
These "hate sites" are labelled hate sites because they offer opinions that fall outside the consensus that the ruling elites find acceptable.
Because a lot of time government release information until much later.Who killed Kennedy?Nobody knows.but nobody believes Oswald did it either.
I have no doubt that Jinn, herzog, bostonian and all the other twats will try and make you believe that Oswald shot Kennedy.
cretin_slap I like your comments and I fully agree.
I think hate groups are hilarious. Stupid people are a great source of amusement especially in masses. I couldn't give a f**k less about what their cause is.
Educate people not to believe anything on the internet.
by ABC on Thu Jun 17, 04 11:47am
[+]
since you can't see a person face to face, then all the closet racists and trouble makers rear their ugly heads. it's easy to insult a person that you can't see, doesn't know you, and masks their identity from you.
things would be much different if the person you insulted was sitting in the same room with you.
the same can be applied to politicians and arm-chair warriors such that can be found in the bush administration.
it takes more guts to shoot someone point blank, up close and personal, than to be 20,000 miles away, in a secure building, pushing buttons and sending missles and bombs to kill your enemy.
a lot of the corporate war-mongering right wing facists in the Bush administration have never even fired a weapon, and they are ordering soldiers around to do the murdering business for them.
go figure.
cretin,how much do we really know?I have no doubt that general public in Palestaine are the victims but who victimized them??I don't think it's Israel.I think there are some people who want Palestine to remain caotic war zone.How about Arafat?As long as Palestine is combat zone,he keeps getting bunch of fund from all over the world.
Idon't know much about that but it would not surprise me at all if Arafat was not what he presents himself to be. What is definite is the fact that the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis is being deliberately drawn out. Who really wants continuous violence?
Also I have seen a few tv programmes, films and read articles about the situation out there and it is clear that ordinary Palestinians get the roughest deal. Yes Israelis arekilled by suicide bombers and gunfire but it doesn't take a genius to work out which party is being suppressed. I will not be surprised when the deliberate provocation of the Iraq war turns into another supposedly Muslim terrorist attack that brings down the American economy and lets Bush announce martial law.
Very interesting assessment indeed Cretin.
While I don't appreciate the hate group concept, I'd have to disagree with working to keep them off the Internet, just on the free speech principle.
You are all growing your comments from the infertile assumption that these hate groups dont have a point, thus your view is skewed by the subjectivity of your distaste. Though they may be offensive and irrational in the way they present their case, perhaps you should ask WHY they hate rather than WHAT can we do to keep them out of sight. OPEN YOUR MINDS PEOPLE!
"Hate on the rise on the Internet" Is a media slogan invented by the media owners (we all know who they are) because they are having problems controlling opinion and free speech on the internet. 'hate groups', and 'terrorists' are buzzwords to describe anybody who does not agree with official dogma.
Education is the answer not censorship. The only people who want censorship are those who fear the truth.
Heretic made an excellent point. Anyone can make a point in the internet, and if it goes against the grain the band of internet enforcers use every trick in the book to try and make people ignore it. These enforcers never directly address the issue raised by the non-comformists or evil Nazi terrorists, but they attack their sources, use ridicule and a pompous, arrogant style to make people think they know what they are talking about.
"Education is the answer not censorship. " ~Heretic
Education or Indoctrination?
Although I do not agree with his take on the Arab-Israeli question, I agree with Cretin on his statement:
These "hate sites" are labelled hate sites because they offer opinions that fall outside the consensus that the ruling elites find acceptable.
All this politically correct nonsense can be very annoying. Why not just let people be free? Allow people to associate with whomever they please. Allow them to like or dislike whatever cultures they want. Why should government be allowed to tell us who we should be friends with and who we should not?
Heretic,
You hit the nail on the head!
There should be a law to ban them.
by seon on Mon Nov 08, 04 11:21pm
[+]
There should be a law to ban them.
by seon on Nov 09, 2004
And when your site is labeled a hate site because it disagrees with the ruling elites. Shall we outlaw that, too?
Everybody's biased in their own way. For instance, I don't really care for Republicans/religious fanatics, etc. I don't like people who smoke. However, since I have the right not to like any of these people, then why shouldn't I have the right go online and express my feelings about them?
Voted : It is good to express oneself freely and openly, to the greatest extent possible (-:
There are thorns among the roses, life is not all peaches and cream. Hate is strong dislike of something or someone and seems to occur quite naturally from time to time, from place to place. As for me, I like what I like and I don't like what I don't like. I do not usually feel free to express any 'negative' thoughts or feelings in public of course, so must 'pretend' to be positive and nice all the time. Honesty is not always possible, is it.
All people are not equal. Not all people are valuable.
Different people have different ideas as to what would constitute a 'perfect' or 'ideal world'.
I 'tolerate' people only because I have no choice in the matter. There is no real alternative.
Hate can sometimes lead to fear or danger or violence or death, and that's unfortunate. Do not 'love' the enemy. Do not 'tolerate' the enemy. Oppose the enemy, eliminate the enemy. Express thyself. The enemy is everywhere, the land has been overrun and invaded and infiltrated everywhere. 'Love' the enemy if you think you can, but do not surrender your basic independence and freedoms, if you don't really like something or someone let others know, this freedom of speech thing is very interesting..
|
|
