Dr.Colosso
Member
No way! Really? Yeah there are loads of tyrannical assholes here.
Last edited:
GB: No Freedom of Speech Anymore
- Thread starter George1959
- Start date
rbtvgo
Member
- Location
- Absecon, new jersey
final note to you. Someone once told me that I was too detailed. Too obsessed. To much! Their final comment was that "you bore me!".
My final comment to you is the same.
Oh no! Please don’t say such terrible things about me. I’m very sensitive, and you’ve hurt my feelings.
rbtvgo
Member
- Location
- Absecon, new jersey
I have been upset about my previous response. Regardless of whether your resent response is sincere or just sarcastic matters little to me. I apologize for my comments. Very Inappropriate and uncalled for. Again my, apologies.
VaughanJB
Scrappy VIP
This made me laugh, and it's time for a confession. Growing up in the 60's and 70's, the Soho area of London was very very seedy. In fact, it was in turns disgraceful and hilarious. It was an area rife with stores selling pornography, prostitute dens, and alcohol. Amsterdam, with its windows, was seedy, but knowingly so. Quaint even, when compared with Soho.
Through the years Soho has become completely gentrified, clean even. Sanitized. What was is gone. But man, do I miss those days when it was a entire culture unto its own. In breaking through the criminality, it lost all its luster and meaning to be.
RambleTamble
Member
- Location
- U.S.
That's sounds exactly like what happened to Times Square in NY. It used to be like what was depicted in the movie Taxi Driver. Now it's a place where you can bring the whole family for a vacation.
rbtvgo
Member
- Location
- Absecon, new jersey
I grew up and wasted my youth in Asbury Park. 4 lanes, stop light at every street. Police just handed out tickets from the street corner. Drag races street to street. 427 corvettes, hemi's, street legal cobra's. Name it and it was there. Concerts at the convention center, Beach Boys, Four Tops, Shirelles, Chad and Jeremy, Dick Clarks Cavalcade. Stone pony came a little later. Bruce Springsteen, Bon Jovi. Southside Johnny and the Asbury Jukes. He was a freshman when I was a senior. Memories, memories.
I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Stuff
Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Stuff
A teacher in an English school was accused of posing a risk to children and referred to the British Government’s counter-terrorism programme after showing Donald Trump videos to his US politics class.
The teacher, who is in his 50s, has told The Telegraph he was “likened to a terrorist” after showing the videos, including one of Trump’s inauguration, to A-level students.
Henley College, a sixth-form in Henley-on-Thames, Oxfordshire, with more than 2000 students, reported the politics lecturer to the local child safeguarding authority, which concluded a referral to Prevent, the UK Government’s counter-terrorism programme, was a “priority”.
The teacher was accused of causing his A-level students, aged 17 and 18, “emotional harm”. In one document, seen by The Telegraph, local officials in charge of child protection suggested the showing of the videos could amount to a “hate crime”.
The extraordinary claims prompted the teacher, who first qualified in the mid 1990s, to begin a grievance procedure against the college. In a negotiated settlement, it gave him a £2000 (NZ$4630) payoff after effectively forcing him to resign from his £44,000 (NZ$102,000)-a-year post.
His case is the latest uncovered by The Telegraph in which child protection laws have seemingly been used to try to ban adults with alleged right-wing views from working with children.
The Free Speech Union believes the laws, intended to protect children from murderers and rapists, are being wrongly used to go after adults with unfashionable opinions. It said the teacher’s case was a clear example of child safeguarding protocols “being weaponised to silence someone for political reasons”.
The teacher, who does not wish to be identified, said: “They likened me to a terrorist. It was completely jarring. It’s dystopian, like something from a George Orwell novel.”
Documents seen by The Telegraph show how Henley College began its investigations in January 2025 after complaints were made by two of the lecturer’s students. He was accused of “biased” and “off topic” teaching.
A scene from the Daddy’s Home video made by Roseanne Barr and a Canadian rapper in tribute to Donald Trump and shown by the teacher to his class. Photo: YouTube
The college said in an official email dated Jan 28 that he was alleged “to have shown your students videos of Donald Trump, his campaign, propaganda and other videos which are unrelated to what is being taught”.
The college then claimed that one of the videos had “made one of the students feel quite uncomfortable”.
The teacher said: “It was just terrifying; just mind-boggling. We were discussing the US election, Trump had just won and I showed a couple of videos from the Trump campaign. Next thing, I was accused of bias. One of the students said they were emotionally disturbed and claimed to have had nightmares.”
Asked if he was a far-Right extremist, the teacher, a practising Catholic who admits he is a Republican supporter but is adamant that his views are mainstream, said: “I am not an extremist.”
He accused the college of a “complete Left-wing bias”, adding: “They don’t tolerate anything about Donald Trump.”
The college referred the case to the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO), the official in charge of investigating safeguarding concerns.
The LADO report, dated May 22, said the teacher’s views “could be perceived as radical” and that Henley College “should complete a Prevent referral”.
It went on: “There is concern that this behaviour could cause harm to a child, there could be a criminal offence from the views which could constitute a hate crime and it’s possible that his promoting of views could be radicalisation.”
Prevent is the Government’s strategy for trying to tackle terrorism by intervening w
Donald Trump’s inauguration was featured in one of the videos the teacher showed to his class. Photo: Matt Rourke / AP
Pupils alleged teaching was ‘biased and off-topic’
The teacher said: “I felt completely insulted at the suggestion I was a danger to children. It impacted my mental health. I had to see a counsellor. It upset my physical health. It was absolutely appalling. It really overwhelmed me.”
He received a formal letter in April telling him he was accused of misconduct. His alleged offence was to have caused “emotional harm… to your students as a result of you sharing inappropriate content (especially videos) with them and having a lack of balance when presenting political views with an emphasis on Right-wing, potentially extremist views”.
The letter cited allegations from students that “your teaching is biased and off topic to the extent that it has become a distraction from what the students are supposed to be learning”.
Among the videos was a music video titled Daddy’s Home, made by Roseanne Barr, the US comedian and Trump supporter, and Tom MacDonald, a Canadian performer dubbed the Maga Rapper. The video has had 7.8 million views on YouTube and was suggested to the teacher by one of his pupils.
The teacher remains baffled that the video – set to a backdrop of cheering Maga supporters – could possibly cause a student to become “emotionally disturbed”.
He says he is convinced he was targeted by a group of students after taking over their politics class at the start of September 2024. The previous year he had taught business studies at the college and was praised for his work, but he was switched to politics to help out with staff shortages.
The teacher, who is now working as a supply teacher while seeking a full-time post, has extensive family ties to the US but insists his Republican views are not extreme, pointing out that Trump won the electoral college convincingly as well as the popular vote.
He was teaching the students classes on politics and propaganda, and says he also showed them Kamala Harris videos. He had showed about five Trump-related videos before the complaint was made.
In April 2025, he wrote to JD Vance, the US vice-president, complaining that his was “a shocking case of the imposition of communist-style silencing of opinion and narratives counter to that imposed by the intolerant far Left”, adding: “My career is at risk due to this shocking mistreatment at the hands of overtly one-sided individuals with their hatred of the US Republican party and their agenda to silence anybody who disagrees or has differing perspectives and opinions.” He has no idea if the letter ever reached Vance.
In April, the teacher wrote to JD Vance complaining that his was “a shocking case of the imposition of communist-style silencing of opinion”. Photo: Jacquelyn Martin / AP
‘Bullied and harassed’
He contacted the Free Speech Union (FSU) for assistance to fight off the claim of “misconduct” and the ongoing disciplinary investigation. He was eventually given a written warning
The FSU, which provides legal assistance for members, claimed in its defence that he was a victim of “bullying and harassment”, and had also been accused of showing a “genocide video” to children. It pointed out the video was part of a set of teaching materials provided by the Holocaust Education Trust.
Lord Young, the director of the FSU and a Tory peer, said: “The United States is our closest ally and Donald Trump is its democratically elected leader. Showing one of his election adverts to a class of politics students, particularly alongside one of Kamala Harris’s, does not make you a risk to children.
“There is a clear-cut case of safeguarding protocols being weaponised to silence someone for political reasons.”
Henley College, which attracts students from Oxfordshire, Berkshire, and Buckinghamshire, said: “The Henley College does not comment on individual allegations or ongoing investigations.
“We are committed to safeguarding the wellbeing of all our students and staff, and follow statutory safeguarding procedures in line with Keeping Children Safe in Education 2025.
“Allegations are handled with due care, in accordance with statutory guidance, with appropriate support provided to all involved.”
- The Telegraph
TabbyAnn
Indiana, U.S.A.
- Location
- Indiana USA
Thanks for reporting this issue. It should be a cautionary tale for the United States. In some Muslim countries you can be decapitated for criticism of Islam or Muhammad. In western cultures, freedom of speech laws are under attack by other laws such as hate speech laws.
I don't know about that. Not to get political (since it's not allowed on SF) but the US probably isn't far behind. Unless you don't go with the status quo, you never know what the consequences in the future might be. That's scary! I wouldn't want to be young again in this present world as it stands right now. I've even tamed down my rhetoric in recent months.
I would rather have minor limitations to my free speech i n that I am not allowed to do hate speech - rather than have hate speech legal and people at risk of real attacks provoked and encouraged by hate speech.
I'd like a dollar for every time I said that.
In my recent studies the sociology lecturer asked one person from each generation to give the room their perspective on how they live their lives, starting with the youngest.
The lecturer and I were the only Boomer's so I was asked to speak. As I listened to each successive generation it became apparent that freedoms young Boomer's took for granted were history...
Sunkist
Member
Agreed. Excellent way of looking at it.
I agree because we know how easy it is to whip up a frenzy on social media with misinformation.
gruntlabor
Well-known Member
- Location
- Last Frontier, Age 83
Minor? We'll soon be stringing up six-year-olds for saying, "Your grandmother wears a girdle." Why? Because feelings are hurt.
Try North Korea. Bring your warm jammies. Actually forget the jammies I'm sure they'll issue you something.
The problem is that you’re framing this as a choice we don’t actually face in the United States. We already have laws against speech that directly incites violence or criminal acts. Those limits have existed for a long time and are well-established. So the idea that “hate speech must be restricted or people will be at risk” ignores the fact that advocacy of violence is already illegal.
What “hate speech” laws add is something different, they regulate opinions, viewpoints, and expressions that fall short of incitement. And once the state is empowered to decide which ideas are unacceptable, that power never stays narrowly confined. History shows it expands, and it inevitably gets used against unpopular or dissenting speech.
Protecting free speech doesn’t mean tolerating violence, it means recognizing that the line should remain at criminal action and direct incitement, not at subjective judgments about offense or ideology. The moment speech is restricted because it is deemed “hateful,” the standard becomes political, not legal and that’s where real danger begins.
As fear mongering goes, 7 1/2 out of 10 for that effort.
As I have pointed out before hate speech has a legal definition and your hypothetical scenario is not it at all
Whataboutery is a fun game but it isn't at all the real situation.
So because Nth Korea is an extreme example nowhere should have any hate speech laws???
No I don't agree with that nor do I see how it is relevant.
I love these new words, English is an evolving language...
Hate speech laws are a tool the Government can use to punish dissidents. It is used selectively as to what the Government deems as hate speech.
Would you care to back that statement up with some reasoning why you think it's so?