Justin Barrett and Aine Ni Chonaill speaking at UCD debate today! Protest against it(at least!)

by Semi Thu Jan 06, 2005 18:48

Well done to the comrades who stuffed Barret and pissed off every soft-right whinger of which sad to say there seems to be no shortgage in this Celtic Badger Ireland of ours.

This equating of the denial of free speech to fascists is at best simple-minded and at worst sinister. The outrage shown no doubt provided encouragement to those seeking to organise the far right in this country as it suggests a sheep like constituency out there somewhere who get energised by a minute amount of left wing violence but would doubtless cheer on the cops when brutalising "lefties".

Republicans were long denied freedom of speech in this country but I don't recall much protests about denials of free speech then. And allegedy "number of the main instigators of the action were dressed in black! " They must be regretting that major slip up, they were really showing themselves to be as bad as the fash there, why didn't they wear white like the good guys do?

by Huk Wed Oct 27, 2004 17:24

everyone's sick of telling them this, Mark, but it seems that tsome are bent on digging their own hole- so good riddence to them!

by Mark Wed Oct 27, 2004 15:06

I am completely disgusted by this call to prevent the debate from going foward, and utterly sickened by what actually took place. No one has the right to deny another's right to free speech. If Barret's and Ní Conaill's political views are so absurd (and incidentally I believe they are) then they can be deconsructed in a democratic fashion, with intelligent and open debate.
Preventing them from speaking with this nauseating, moralistic belief that you have the right to decide what the public should and shouldn't hear is blatantly fascist. According to one newspaper report, a number of the main instigators of the action were dressed in black! Was this a deliberate irony?! I'd like to believe so, but sadly I suspect it simply further confirms the ignorance and stupidity of the participants. Cop on to yourselves.

by George Mon Oct 18, 2004 17:13

I fear his death was greatly exaggerated (by Joe Duffy seeking to boost his ratings). Barrett himself said this on the 'Last Word' on Friday.

"Well this is the odd thing, that I wasn't badly hurt at all! I don't
even have so much as a bruise"

by grimpeur Mon Oct 18, 2004 17:10

As far as i can see, the most intelligent course of action would have been organising a mass boycott of the event. Beating the worm up was over the top. An empty event would give the L&H the message that they shouldn't be giving people like Barrett a platform to propagate their hatred. This would be a form of voluntary censorship, the censorship of the masses rather than of a central authority.

by - Wed Oct 13, 2004 20:13

since the beginning of 2004 of all the site closed in the USA and EU for breaking the law, the majority have been far right.
Of those sites related to media which have been attacked "on the left" only http://hezbolah.net did not attract support from the main civil rights organisations.
Of those left wing sites which were closed or attacked, all returned to the web including http://la haine and http://indymedia.
This is a small sign that the left (or if you will the far left) is not as hate filled, and law breaking as the far right. Allow a neonazi fifteen minutes speaking time and they will break the law by either denying the Holocaust or inciting hatred of a minority. Allow them 3mb webspace and they will break the law by denying the Holocaust, peddling forbidden and proscribed WW2 memorabilia or inciting hatred of minorities or providing personal details of leftwing acitivists with the clear intent of facilitating attacks.

This is something "we" do not do.

by annon Wed Oct 13, 2004 17:30

http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?story_id=63890

Well worth a read....

by jum Wed Oct 13, 2004 17:25

We,the radical left regard themselves the sole arbitors of what their inferior fellow citizens should be allowed to hear. It is our duty to patrionise our unfortunate, brainwashed and misguided people and protect them naughty people like J.Barrett.

by Peter Wed Oct 13, 2004 17:04 ohpeterbaby at hotmail dot com

I believe in the concept of free speech. I am definitely not a fan of Barrett or Ni Chonaill, but is not a mistake to try and actually stop people speaking ? Sorry but this sounds a bit too totalitarian to me. Let them speak, along with everyone else and then lets show their views up for what they are in a focussed and measured way.