Google
 

De Lille goes George Bush on South Africa

05/22/07

De Lille goes George Bush on South Africa

Permalink 10:44:33 am, Categories: Political Views, Current Events and News, Kultcha, 453 words

I read a news article yesterday about Patricia De Lille of the Independent Democrats reaction to a defamatory post about Simon Grindrod in some blog somewhere on the Internet. What is De Lille’s response? To go all George Bush Patriot Act on us!

De Lille fires off some slimy old lines about terrorists, pedophiles and the boogeyman to try take away your freedom of speech, so she can protect her little political people. I think the concept of Freedom of Speech completely evades Patricia De Lille. Freedom of speech does not mean censoring people. Freedom of speech does not mean centralization of information or power. Sure, there are some disgusting people on the internet, but on the same token we have disgusting people in parliament. Are we going to ban parliament because there are woman abusers in it?

What Politian’s like De Lille do is the same old story time after time. Something will upset them like this defamatory incident, and the next second they are on their soap box trying to incite the ignorant rabble for their “I-am-not-doing-this-for-personal-gain” crusade. One would think that Patricia De Lille would catch a bit of a wake up, especially after noticing how Freedom of Speech was thrown out the window during Apartheid, but one would be wrong.
De Lille seems to be a bit on the slow side when it comes to understanding the power of social networking and instead of dealing with rumors and the blogosphere in the correct method; she goes all totalitarian on us.

Of course she would have us believe that the “real” reason why she is doing this is to protect us from all the evil people out there (insert terrorists, pedophiles and co), instead of the real reason… Sis De Lille… sis! Take your attempts to stifle free speech and stick them somewhere liable. You seem to so easily forget, that the most important type of free speech to allow is that which you hate hearing the most.

I know for a fact this little escapade has cost her at least one vote. Mine. I used to be a strong ID supporter but now I have decided to jump the stupid ship. I need a Politian who has a clue and knows what’s going on in my world, and not just their world. I hear Helen Zille has a YouTube like Zoopy blog going… I think I will go have a look.

Find out more information here: http://www.mybroadband.co.za/nephp/?m=show&id=6490

Edit: The link to the Helen Zille's Zoopy page: http://www.zoopy.com/Helen
Edit: Link to the Mail & Guardian article quoting this blog post: M & G Article

Permalink 10 comments

Comments:

Comment from: Hugo [Visitor]
So how about a link to Helen Zille's YouTube blog thingy? ;)
Permalink 05/22/07 @ 14:04
Comment from: pb [Member]
http://www.zoopy.com/Helen
Permalink 05/22/07 @ 14:24
Comment from: Twylite [Visitor]
Look up "strawman". It's where you make up a story, attribute it to someone else, attack it, and then claim that you win.

De Lille did not mention terrorists or censorship. Read the press release for yourself on the ID web site, and so stop peddling that bullshit.

She DID mention defamation (which is a crime, unconstitutional, and not protected speech), inability to trace the author, and a resulting lack of "legal consequences they would face in other more reputable print and electronic media".

Did she say she wants to censor blogs? No. Did she say she wants to track down and sue a specific blogger in terms of existing law? Yes.

Read the latest post on my site. It gives more detail to this.
Permalink 05/22/07 @ 17:44
Comment from: pb [Member]
Hi Twylite thanks for posting. You seem to have completly missed the point I was trying to get across. When I mentioned De Lille and Bush together the idea was to try convey a point. De Lille is playing the "save-the-children" card with pedophiles, and Bush is playing the "stop-the-terrorist" card. Hence the reason I mentioned the Patriot Act. Its what happens when people over react.

Both those people want to mess with our rights to achieve their own personal objectives. In the case of De Lille she wants to regulate blogs. I think you may have missed that. After reading your post I will also assume the definition of free speech evades you. Free speech means hearing the stuff you hate hearing the most. No matter what.

A suggestion for you... look up the word "Analogy". This is not about winning mate. I was simply stating my opinion.
Permalink 05/22/07 @ 19:23
Comment from: Twylite [Visitor]
Hi. I'm addressing specifically the blogging issue here. My feeling on MXIT is that it is a carrier and subject to the same regulations on content as fixed line and mobile operators; which is to say not much.

Yes, De Little wants to regulate blogs. Here's a more recent quote from here in the media: "Is there not a way, without dismissing the concept of blogging and MXit, to make sure that when people are defamed or slandered, they are able to take the same action to which they are entitled when it happens in print and electronic media?"

Did she say censor? No. She said that when someone steps over the limits of freedom of speech laid down in the constitution, there needs to be a way to hold them accountable. That's also regulation, but its not censorship.

As for freedom of speech, I'm afraid I can't agree with your definition. Free speech is not about hearing stuff. Freedom of association allows you to choose what you want to hear. Free speech is about saying stuff.

Freedom of speech means the right to say stuff in public without fear of sanction or reprisal from the government, with the exception of certain speech that is so at odds with society that it cannot be condoned ever (hate speech, incitement to violence). It is about the free flow of ideas that are necessary to maintain democracy.

Three are three really important things about freedom of speech:

1. It refers to public speech. Private speech is protected by your right to privacy, but public speech isn't.

2. Your freedom of speech places a duty on the government (to respect that freedom), but not on other citizens. No-one has to listen to you, and an individual can restrict your freedom of speech when it conflicts with their rights, but the government cannot restrict your freedom to express your views in public, except ...

3. There are dozens of ways that freedom of speech is restricted. Contracts, duty of good faith to your employer, sexual harassment, threat, and defeating the ends of justice are examples of situations where you do not have a right to say what you want. Your speech in these circumstances is limited so that other people can protect their rights that are in conflict with yours, and this is consistent with sections 16(2) and 36 of the constitution.

If you think that freedom of speech gives you the right to spread malicious lies, to defame, or to talk dirty to your secretary, then you are mistaken. Free speech is not a wholesale license to infringe on the rights of others.
Permalink 05/23/07 @ 14:23
Comment from: pb [Member]
Free= no restrictions. Look it up in the dictionary sometime.
Permalink 05/24/07 @ 08:43
Comment from: Karl [Visitor]
yip - slander = spoken vs libel = written

not that it makes any difference in SA where there is no such distinction drawn...so "slanderous and defamatory" may sound impressive but it really shows you have no clue.

"slanderous and defamatory comments with impunity about anyone they choose, without the legal consequences they would face in other more reputable print and electronic media."

...by which, no doubt, she means the cape voice etc etc ?

& there are plenty of legal consequences available if you overstep the bounds of free speech, even on the internet
Permalink 05/24/07 @ 11:35
Comment from: pb [Member]
I thought this news information would be most useful for Twylite to understand my perspective:


The Internet is the new frontline in the war for human rights, as governments battle to stamp out online opposition voices, Amnesty International said on Wednesday.


"In an age of technology, the Internet has become the new frontier in the struggle for the right to dissent," said Amnesty International chief Irene Khan, in the foreword to the rights group's latest annual report.

Specifically, she said governments in Belarus, China, Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Tunisia are "monitoring chat rooms, deleting blogs, restricting search engines and blocking websites" with the help of major world IT firms.

In addition, "people have been imprisoned in China, Egypt, Syria, Uzbekistan and Vietnam for posting and sharing information online."

But the group vowed not to back down: "Everyone has the right to seek and receive information and to express their peaceful beliefs without fear or interference."

In China, access has been blocked to several hundred international websites, while thousands of Chinese sites have been closed down, Amnesty said, citing a Tibetan blog shut down after having questioned Beijing's role in Tibet.

Bloggers have been sentenced to jail terms and to beatings in Iran, where access to the Internet is increasingly strictly controlled, it said.

It accuses Vietnam of seeking to strengthen its control of the Internet via new rules, by getting managers of Internet cafes and service providers to watch users and by filtering or blocking certain websites.

It cited the example of Bloc 8406 in Vietnam, an Internet-based pro-democracy movement whose backers faced harassment, restrictions on movement and confiscation of computers.

In the Gulf state of Bahrain, seven websites were banned in October, while in Myanmar the government has blocked numerous sites, as is the case in Syria where access has been stopped to dozens of websites, Amnesty said.
"

http://mybroadband.co.za/nephp/?m=show&id=6518
Permalink 05/24/07 @ 12:33
Comment from: pb [Member]
Mail & Guardian article quoting from this post: http://www.mg.co.za/personalfinance/articlePage.aspx?articleId=309159&area=/breaking_news/breaking_news__business/
Permalink 05/30/07 @ 17:12
Comment from: Forexman [Visitor]
Hi. This is really interesting post. Thank You! I have just subscribed to Your rss!

Best regards
Permalink 05/25/08 @ 03:51

This post has 1 feedback awaiting moderation...

Leave a comment:

Your email address will not be displayed on this site.
Your URL will be displayed.

Allowed XHTML tags: <p, ul, ol, li, dl, dt, dd, address, blockquote, ins, del, span, bdo, br, em, strong, dfn, code, samp, kdb, var, cite, abbr, acronym, q, sub, sup, tt, i, b, big, small>
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Set cookies for name, email and url)
(Allow users to contact you through a message form (your email will NOT be displayed.))

pickledbushman.com

My status

Contact Me

wtf is wrong with all you people?

 << <September 2010> >>
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30    

Search

Categories

pickledbushman.com

Archives

Linkblog

leet software

leet sites

Who's Online?

Account

Sponsor


Linkage

ANTOWAN
CARLSPIES
FMTECH
SHUTTLEWORTH
SHOPBOT.CO.NZ
IAN FRASER
JHBLIVE.COM
NEWZ
ANTITRUST
HELLKOM
TAG
LIBRE
BEENZ

Syndicate this blog

powered by
B2/Evolution

I shmaak SA Blogs, sorted with Amatomu.com

Afrigator

Static Page 1
Static Page 2

Sponsor


Valid XHTML || Valid CSS || Valid RSS || Valid Atom