Bluedell 5,513 Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 If it meant being sent to prison or getting a huge fine I'd stop drinking beer. Of course I would! What point is there me challenging a ruling? People way above me are paid to do stuff like that. So you just want other people to fight for your rights? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazza_8 233 Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 So you just want other people to fight for your rights? Yeah I really couldn't care either way mate. I goto work every day, come home, relax and goto bed. No hassles!! I'd rather stand up for what I believe in than bow down and allow myself to be dictated to by those who hate our club. Good for you. At the end of the day there's nothing that people like you and I can do. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,394 Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 If it meant being sent to prison or getting a huge fine I'd stop drinking beer. Of course I would! What point is there me challenging a ruling? People way above me are paid to do stuff like that. Really am astounded by that. You really think the proletariat are incapable of challenging what they feel are unfair issues and should bow to any instruction placed upon them? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gribz 745 Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 If it meant being sent to prison or getting a huge fine I'd stop drinking beer. Of course I would! What point is there me challenging a ruling? People way above me are paid to do stuff like that. Gav this is exactly why there is so many sheep in the world and how Governments are suceeding in creating Globalization and taking simple rights away from people - because when someone is told to do something they just accept it regardless and just leave it to the next man to protest about it - yet when the average person hears of a protestor on the news they class them as idiots as this is what the news portrays them to be. If everyone stood together and fought back at ridiculous rules then the "authorites" would HAVE to back down - just like what happened with Poll Tax IIRC. Changes are happening infront of our faces daily and we just seem to accept it. Yet the percentage of the population who are saying these 'rules' is a tiny tiny fraction compared the population they are trying to enforce them on. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,394 Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 Yeah I really couldn't care either way mate. I goto work every day, come home, relax and goto bed. No hassles!!. Right, comfortable beds are now banned because they cause back problems amongst the workforce. Now, you've to sleep on a hard wooden floor say the government and the police will enforce this new law. "That's fine", says Gazza! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazza_8 233 Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 Right, comfortable beds are now banned because they cause back problems amongst the workforce. Now, you've to sleep on a hard wooden floor say the government and the police will enforce this new law. "That's fine", says Gazza! Oooooooooooft, no one is taking my bed away from me. I'd fight that! You can take my beer but you'll never take my BED!! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazza_8 233 Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 If everyone stood together and fought back at ridiculous rules then the "authorites" would HAVE to back down. Remove me from the equation here and do you honestly think that everyone else in the world will stand together and fight the governing bodies? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CammyF 7,613 Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 Seriously, what this country requires is a good old 3-4 years of complete and utter anarchy - I watched the greeks rioting in Athens with envy and wondered why this country sits on its arse and lets the government take our freedoms, liberties, jobs, money and sells this wonderful land down the river. As Joe Strummer once said - White Riot, I wanna riot, white riot, I'll riot on my own [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9Eck6rox0s]YouTube - The Clash - White Riot[/ame] [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bM_l443VV4&feature=related]YouTube - Sex Pistols - Anarchy in the UK (Studio Version)[/ame] Cammy F - I Am An Anti-Christ I Am A Anarchist Loyal RSC 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 (edited) I think Gazza has a point in that, you don't have to defy the law to challenge your rights. However, I think we've strayed off the real issue here. The point is that no-one could have guessed that the song is illegal in any way. The guy had no idea he was breaking the law as it is incredibly hard to see how it can be possibly interpreted as racist. The guy was asked not to sing it at Ibrox and so throwing him out would have been fair enough, but how could he have known he was breaking the law? In my opinion he wasn't and that the interpretation of one judge is extreme and misguided. His conviction just doesn't make common sense and it seems he has been punished for words he didn't sing and are not part of the song except for one extreme version that nobody sings. It's akin to convicting an Englishman for racism against Scots for singing God Save the Queen, as there is a version which contains a verse which could be considered anti-Scottish. Or how about arresting Tina Turner for singing Simply the Best due to some old Ibrox add-ons? I've said before that contentious songs like this need to be properly debated and a judgement passed on them BEFORE they are made illegal. Fair enough arrest someone when the racism is blatant, but not when it takes a giant leap of logic to come to the racist conclusion. And Frankie is also right, not only is this arrest decision bizarre, it's also not evenly and fairly applied across our society. There are plenty of far more obviously offensive songs that are completely ignored and somehow tolerated. I would say the plastic paddy song is way down the list and still think it's hard to justify condemning it as racist. Edited December 18, 2008 by calscot 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,394 Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 Well said cal.. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.