Well some comments on the internet made ABOUT me are full of filth certainly.
Isn't it fair to read and to listen to what I have got to say about myself first?
If someone made a filthy comment about you Camac - should you be not allowed in this forum? No, of course you should be allowed and so should I.
Also my For Freedom Forums are for ROBUST political debate which means strong language is allowed to be used sometimes. Not always - they are very intellectual forums but strong language can be used from time to time without anyone getting banned.
A proper political forum SHOULD allow people to use strong language about things they feel strongly about.
If strong language and the people who use strong language is banned from a forum - then that forum isn't a proper political forum, just a kid-on "political forum" in name only.
Perhaps people who never like strong language think it is more important to be polite about stupid, dangerous fools in charge of things who get the Scots and other Celts killed because of their stupidity?
I think a person would have to be living in a protected bubble if no-one has ever made that person so angry with their stupidity or evil that that person thought it appropriate to use strong language about those who had made him or her so angry.
I have to write about very stupid, dangerous and lethal people in charge all the time in politics so it is natural that I use strong language from time to time but that does not make my criticisms wrong, just difficult to hear for some sensitive people maybe.
Well what is worse do you think?
- A bit of strong language to save some lives or
- just allowing Scots and other Celts to be killed and keeping very polite about it?
I know what I think is worse.
Let's have an example.
Supposing the people had been able to swear on TV about the Queen and the police giving a firearms certificate to Thomas Hamilton who therefore was allowed to keep guns he later used to kill the children at the Dunblane Primary School Massacre.The Dunblane Primary School Children - 16 of whom and their teacher were shot dead in Dunblane, Scotland.
Supposing people BEFORE THE MASSACRE those citizens who had big concerns about Hamilton had been allowed to shout and swear at the Queen and her police for allowing guns in the hands of a man they did not trust.
Suppose they had been allowed to shout and to swear so much, at the police station, on TV and in public meetings that this embarrassed the police and they could not just ban them like you would like to ban me.
Supposing they were allowed to show EXACTLY how angry they were with the stupid people the Queen allows in charge of the Scots?
Supposing Scotland was a free country and we were allowed to be angry at stupidity and we were allowed to show it, by shouting and swearing at the stupid police when they do something stupid?
I think the police would be so embarrassed that they would be forced to do a better job and save some lives.
What we have now is a polite silence as the Queen, her ministers and her police get innocent people killed.
I think it is worth allowing strong language if that means we can embarrass the stupid people into not being in charge of things all the time.
If we had that freedom to be angry and show it, those children would be alive today and many others would have been saved who have also been killed because those who knew better had to be polite and respectful as their good advice was ignored.
As it is, the Dunblane Primary School children are dead, because no-one is allowed to get angry about the stupidity which runs Scotland.
That is why so many people are being killed today for one reason or another.
The good Scottish clever thinkers and writers are still being banned from public life here in Scotland, same as you want me banned from this forum.The Royal Disasters - The Terrorist Killer QueenDunblane Primary School Massacre Inquiry Cover-up Revealed