Is there freedom of expression on The JC blogs?


By Blacklisted Dictator
July 3, 2010
Share

I refer to the attached, and conclude that there is no longer freedom of expression, on The JC blog.

http://www.thejc.com/blogpost/how-far-will-they-go

Anonymous
1 July, 2010 - 00:50
Comments for this page are now closed.

COMMENTS

Blacklisted Dictator

Sat, 07/03/2010 - 07:29

Rate this:

0 points

Unfortunately, it seems that there isn't.


Blacklisted Dictator

Sat, 07/03/2010 - 07:34

Rate this:

-1 points

Let's see whether this post is now deleted. If it is, I will have to conclude that freedom of expression is being treated with contempt on The JC's blogs.


Joshua18

Sat, 07/03/2010 - 08:59

Rate this:

-1 points

Of course there is. Some examples: I was accused of being Hitler the other day for drawing attention to John Wesley's vicious anti-Semitism, the place is crawling with anti-Semites, you haven't been banned.


Blacklisted Dictator

Sat, 07/03/2010 - 09:02

Rate this:

-1 points

I draw you attention to the recent censorship on Jenni Frazer's blog.


Joshua18

Sat, 07/03/2010 - 09:28

Rate this:

-1 points

"I draw you attention to the recent censorship on Jenni Frazer's blog."

What censorship? The woman gives me the creeps so I rarely look at her blog.


Blacklisted Dictator

Sat, 07/03/2010 - 09:55

Rate this:

-1 points

Q:"What censorship"?

A:"Comments for this page are now closed." (How far will they go?)


Blacklisted Dictator

Sat, 07/03/2010 - 22:09

Rate this:

0 points

Has anybody ever seen an anonymous "comments are now closed" on another blog ?

Or has Jenni Frazer's blog won a first?


happygoldfish

Sat, 07/03/2010 - 22:46

Rate this:

0 points

blacklisted dictator seems to have tried to take over jenni frazer's blog by changing the subject and then asking a series of pointless antagonistic questions

on most forums, trying to take over a thread (or blog) will result in the thread being locked … this is normal

freedom of expression doesn't come into it … if he wants to start his own blog to discuss his allegedly "damnfool questions", he's clearly free to do so

does thejc.com have an infraction system? with the current general level of personal unpleasantness, racism, sexism, and plain "damnfoolery", it certainly needs one


Blacklisted Dictator

Sun, 07/04/2010 - 08:01

Rate this:

0 points

happygoldfish,

Jenni's blog was about the imprisonment of two people for anti-semitic hate speech. She argued that their sentences weren't long enough.

In response I asked her the following:

(1) Do you believe that anti-semitic "hate speech" should be treated more harshly by the courts than the actual desecration of a Jewish cemetery or a physical racist attack?

(2)Should people also be imprisoned for "Islamophobic" hate-speech?

Are these really "damnfool" questions?


Blacklisted Dictator

Sun, 07/04/2010 - 09:08

Rate this:

0 points

happygoldfish

I doubr whether you will respond to my previous comment.

Of course, Jenni Frazer is under no obligation whatsoever to respond to questions on her blog. But when people pose relevant questions, then it does take a certain "intellectual" chutzpah to retort that they are "damnfool questions". In such circumstances, one might conclude that blogging is not actually her metier.


happygoldfish

Sun, 07/04/2010 - 09:24

Rate this:

0 points

Blacklisted Dictator: Are these really "damnfool" questions?

in the context of jenni's blog, yes:

cemeteries and physical attacks were completely off-topic, your "islamophobia" question was completely pointless, and you still went on to pointlessly make three more posts

in any well-run forum, you would be expected to open a new thread rather than hijack an existing one

Blacklisted Dictator: I doubr whether you will respond to my previous comment.

what is wrong with you?

you're doing to me what you did to jenni … write a succession of questions before anyone else has had a chance to reply

the rest of the world does not owe you an answer


Joshua18

Sun, 07/04/2010 - 09:34

Rate this:

-1 points

"blacklisted dictator seems to have tried to take over jenni frazer's blog by changing the subject and then asking a series of pointless antagonistic questions"

I don't agree. I think his questions were for the most part quite pertinent.

BD is actually a very smart individual and he frequently makes some excellent points. His problem relates to his modus operandi which is eccentric to say the least. All in all, I think he does more harm than good here. On the other hand, after her despicable attack on Elie Wiesel, I'm really not concerned how BD treats the Frazer person on these forums. In fact I find her discomfort rather enjoyable.


Joshua18

Sun, 07/04/2010 - 09:40

Rate this:

-1 points

"cemeteries and physical attacks were completely off-topic,"

Her entire premise was barking mad. I would expect more from a first year student at a fake UK university.


Blacklisted Dictator

Sun, 07/04/2010 - 09:46

Rate this:

-1 points

happygoldfish,

Thank you for your response.

Jenni Frazer argued on her blog that the two hate-speech antisemites should have been sentenced for between 7-10yrs. As a result, I wondered whether somebody found guilty of desecrating a Jewish cemetery should be imprisoned for longer.
My question, exposed the weakness of Jenni Frazer's argument. That is presumably why it was a "damnfool" question?

My question about Islamophobic hate speech put her hate speech blog into a wider millieu. After all, Gert Wilders is up on a charge in Holland. As a result, I was pointing to the dangers of throwing people into prison for antisemitic hate-speech.


Joshua18

Sun, 07/04/2010 - 09:57

Rate this:

-1 points

"Her entire premise was barking mad. I would expect more from a first year student at a fake UK university."

I was actually referring to another post in which she compared the sentence given to another sentence for a totally different crime in South Africa. She appears to have deleted that post. I wonder why.


Blacklisted Dictator

Sun, 07/04/2010 - 10:05

Rate this:

-1 points

Joshua,
It has not been deleted. It is still there on the same blog.

Jenni Frazer
28 June, 2010 - 16:31
Rate this:
-1 points
UPDATE: Five hotel workers in South Africa have been found guilty of stealing from the England team. They took £500 and some players' underwear. For these crimes, they were fined 6,000 rand (about £525) and got THREE YEARS IN PRISON. Let us meditate on a fine world in which meddling with a footballer's underwear gets you a longer prison sentence than being abusive to Jews


Joshua18

Sun, 07/04/2010 - 10:12

Rate this:

-1 points

Thanks.


Blacklisted Dictator

Sun, 07/04/2010 - 13:24

Rate this:

-1 points

Whatever the merit of the questions that I posed (readers will have to draw their own conclusions), there was no reason for "anonymous" to close the comments for the page. It was clearly an infringement on freedom of expression.

In the circumstances, perhaps "anonymous" can identify itself?


Anonymous

Sun, 07/04/2010 - 20:45

Rate this:

1 point

Comments for this page are now closed.

LATEST COMMENTS