Comments on: Comment: In defence of Jan Moir http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/ PinkNews.co.uk Gay News (UK and world) from Pink News - all the gay news for the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered community in the UK and beyond- thegaynews from Pink News Sat, 20 Mar 2010 07:40:05 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: David Styles http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/comment-page-3/#comment-91615 David Styles Mon, 11 Jan 2010 18:34:10 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/#comment-91615 She is an unpleasant woman, but sadly well suited to her publication. You can blame the Daily Mail for most things "wrong" with this country. It's popular press for the masses... of bigots and right wing scum that soil this great country. She is an unpleasant woman, but sadly well suited to her publication. You can blame the Daily Mail for most things "wrong" with this country. It's popular press for the masses… of bigots and right wing scum that soil this great country.

Report this comment to us

]]> By: Brian Burton http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/comment-page-3/#comment-81207 Brian Burton Sat, 07 Nov 2009 06:38:35 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/#comment-81207 CONCLUSION, AFTER 111 COMMENTS: JAN MOIR HAS NO VALID DEFENCE! CONCLUSION, AFTER 111 COMMENTS: JAN MOIR HAS NO VALID DEFENCE!

Report this comment to us

]]> By: Brian Burton http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/comment-page-3/#comment-80345 Brian Burton Sun, 01 Nov 2009 11:48:24 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/#comment-80345 Halcyon, Up yours too dear! Halcyon, Up yours too dear!

Report this comment to us

]]> By: Brian Burton http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/comment-page-3/#comment-80343 Brian Burton Sun, 01 Nov 2009 11:32:16 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/#comment-80343 Halcyon, You are a gutless coward! Halcyon, You are a gutless coward!

Report this comment to us

]]> By: The Halcyon http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/comment-page-3/#comment-80323 The Halcyon Sat, 31 Oct 2009 21:53:45 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/#comment-80323 Thanks for that oh-so thought out and erudite comment Brian. Not only can you not put together a coherent argument but you immediately launch into name-calling. Reported. Thanks for that oh-so thought out and erudite comment Brian. Not only can you not put together a coherent argument but you immediately launch into name-calling. Reported.

Report this comment to us

]]> By: AdrianT http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/comment-page-3/#comment-80193 AdrianT Fri, 30 Oct 2009 17:27:41 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/#comment-80193 Innocent until proven guilty dave - your job to prove the cause, not Jan's to disprive it.... Innocent until proven guilty dave – your job to prove the cause, not Jan's to disprive it….

Report this comment to us

]]> By: dave http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/comment-page-3/#comment-80172 dave Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:07:04 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/#comment-80172 "IN any case. being from south yorkshire, I couldn't be polite if I tried." That looks like stereotyping to me. "But I just won't agree with silencing any opponents through threats, unless they really do intend harm by what they write or say." You can't always know what they intend. "IN any case. being from south yorkshire, I couldn't be polite if I tried."

That looks like stereotyping to me.

"But I just won't agree with silencing any opponents through threats, unless they really do intend harm by what they write or say."

You can't always know what they intend.

Report this comment to us

]]> By: AdrianT http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/comment-page-3/#comment-80009 AdrianT Thu, 29 Oct 2009 23:27:44 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/#comment-80009 I'm not asking anyone to be silent, Paul. By all means, voice disgust on Twitter, Facebook, the comments section of the Daily Mail, YouTube, discussion forums, letters to newspapers, opinion pieces, demonstrations outside Associated 'Newspapers'. I'm delighted you did. I sure there were many more than 20,000 that did that collectively. She's a marked, derided, woman, it's all over her wikipedia profile, for ever and ever. Google her and the results on page one are unprintable. What a legacy to have. All this is deserved, necessary. Someone voiced the concern that I want to politely disagree - no, i'm not. You can see that from my earlier posts over the last year or so, in dealing with religious nutcases who stray onto this site. Johann Hari, Peter Tatchell, Richard dawkins are good examples of how to deal with crackpots. IN any case. being from south yorkshire, I couldn't be polite if I tried. Certainly, it was a pleasure to argue with the fundamentalist protesters at gay pride, and winding them up was great fun. Unfortunately the police spoilt the fun and decided I might start a riot, and began forcing me back. Next year, we'll be bringing megaphones too. But I just won't agree with silencing any opponents through threats, unless they really do intend harm by what they write or say. The greatest battles are of ideas, and if people have no words to fight them with they will resort to other means. I am more concerned that gay hate crime is given proper attention, and that LGBT people have fair representation in the media, which isn't happening. I'm not asking anyone to be silent, Paul. By all means, voice disgust on Twitter, Facebook, the comments section of the Daily Mail, YouTube, discussion forums, letters to newspapers, opinion pieces, demonstrations outside Associated 'Newspapers'. I'm delighted you did. I sure there were many more than 20,000 that did that collectively. She's a marked, derided, woman, it's all over her wikipedia profile, for ever and ever. Google her and the results on page one are unprintable. What a legacy to have. All this is deserved, necessary.

Someone voiced the concern that I want to politely disagree – no, i'm not. You can see that from my earlier posts over the last year or so, in dealing with religious nutcases who stray onto this site. Johann Hari, Peter Tatchell, Richard dawkins are good examples of how to deal with crackpots.

IN any case. being from south yorkshire, I couldn't be polite if I tried. Certainly, it was a pleasure to argue with the fundamentalist protesters at gay pride, and winding them up was great fun. Unfortunately the police spoilt the fun and decided I might start a riot, and began forcing me back. Next year, we'll be bringing megaphones too.

But I just won't agree with silencing any opponents through threats, unless they really do intend harm by what they write or say. The greatest battles are of ideas, and if people have no words to fight them with they will resort to other means.

I am more concerned that gay hate crime is given proper attention, and that LGBT people have fair representation in the media, which isn't happening.

Report this comment to us

]]> By: Paul Mc http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/comment-page-3/#comment-79995 Paul Mc Thu, 29 Oct 2009 19:27:48 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/#comment-79995 Adrian, it was only when 20,000 disgusted individuals raised their online voices high and loud did we manage to put the wind up the Daily Hate and extract even the pseudo apology from Moir. It was only when the fuss was made by people who are not going to write apologies for homophobes and put it it all in the sphere of 'polite debate' that anyone else actually heard or read this odious column and allowed it to be held up for wider public scrutiny. Count me as one of the 20,000 who read it and reacted from the gut. "Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented" Elie Weisel. Adrian, it was only when 20,000 disgusted individuals raised their online voices high and loud did we manage to put the wind up the Daily Hate and extract even the pseudo apology from Moir. It was only when the fuss was made by people who are not going to write apologies for homophobes and put it it all in the sphere of 'polite debate' that anyone else actually heard or read this odious column and allowed it to be held up for wider public scrutiny. Count me as one of the 20,000 who read it and reacted from the gut. "Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented" Elie Weisel.

Report this comment to us

]]> By: The Halcyon http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/comment-page-3/#comment-79979 The Halcyon Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:54:13 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/#comment-79979 Brian Burton - to follow your line of attack would mean that criticism of any dead person is to "descend into the depths of journalistic depravity". So when gay people talk negatively about long dead homophobes like Baroness Young or Idi Amin - is that not the same thing? Brian Burton – to follow your line of attack would mean that criticism of any dead person is to "descend into the depths of journalistic depravity". So when gay people talk negatively about long dead homophobes like Baroness Young or Idi Amin – is that not the same thing?

Report this comment to us

]]> By: Brian Burton http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/comment-page-3/#comment-79974 Brian Burton Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:37:54 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/#comment-79974 Halcyon, Jan Moir dis-honoured a dead person and that ment she decended into the depthes of journalistic depravity. For you to defend her in any form is inexcuseable. Halcyon,
Jan Moir dis-honoured a dead person and that ment she decended into the depthes of journalistic depravity. For you to defend her in any form is inexcuseable.

Report this comment to us

]]> By: Tom A http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/comment-page-3/#comment-79920 Tom A Thu, 29 Oct 2009 15:54:02 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/#comment-79920 I can't be arsed to collate my points into coherent paragraphs so bullets will have to do. 1. Moir's arguments are spectacularly idiotic. Refuting them is almost too easy... yet nobody (bar Adrian) has even attempted to do this. 2. The Wail is presented as a serious paper and its readers believe that the opinions therein are coherent and backed up with evidence. Unlike the 'pure tabloid' readership, Wail readers like to believe that their opinions are thought-out and stand up to scrutiny, despite all evidence to the contrary. Very simple, persuasive and irrefutable arguments are what is required change these people's opinions. Unfortunately, despite their availability (see point 1) most people would rather vent their anger at the fact that the opinions were aired in the first place. 3. In addition to defending Moir's freedom of speech (which as far as I can tell has never been at stake) I believe Adrian is defending her right to skewer herself. After all, few people are capable of doing as much damage to her reputation as a rational being than Moir herself (the same is true of a certain Mr. Griffin). However, in order for this lunacy to be properly exposed, we must do our part by offering rational arguments in return. Shouting hysterically that our human rights have been breached is going to do nothing to persuade somebody who believes we have none in the first place. Exposing irrationality just might. 4. Finally, excellent piece, Adrian. Almost hard to believe it's possible to find people actually arguing against debate, especially one we are so well equipped to win. I can't be arsed to collate my points into coherent paragraphs so bullets will have to do.

1. Moir's arguments are spectacularly idiotic. Refuting them is almost too easy… yet nobody (bar Adrian) has even attempted to do this.

2. The Wail is presented as a serious paper and its readers believe that the opinions therein are coherent and backed up with evidence. Unlike the 'pure tabloid' readership, Wail readers like to believe that their opinions are thought-out and stand up to scrutiny, despite all evidence to the contrary. Very simple, persuasive and irrefutable arguments are what is required change these people's opinions. Unfortunately, despite their availability (see point 1) most people would rather vent their anger at the fact that the opinions were aired in the first place.

3. In addition to defending Moir's freedom of speech (which as far as I can tell has never been at stake) I believe Adrian is defending her right to skewer herself. After all, few people are capable of doing as much damage to her reputation as a rational being than Moir herself (the same is true of a certain Mr. Griffin). However, in order for this lunacy to be properly exposed, we must do our part by offering rational arguments in return. Shouting hysterically that our human rights have been breached is going to do nothing to persuade somebody who believes we have none in the first place. Exposing irrationality just might.

4. Finally, excellent piece, Adrian. Almost hard to believe it's possible to find people actually arguing against debate, especially one we are so well equipped to win.

Report this comment to us

]]> By: The Halcyon http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/comment-page-3/#comment-79915 The Halcyon Thu, 29 Oct 2009 15:33:46 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/#comment-79915 I agree with the view that pieces like Jan Moir’s column are excellent litmus tests for societal attitudes. Ten, even five years ago I would have expected that similar comments (and I can’t name any off the top of my head) were largely undetected/unchecked by the public but with a change in attitudes, 20,000 people felt strongly enough to complain. And I agree that Moir doesn’t owe any apologies for her opinions – she is a columnist, her job is to pen a piece which gives her opinion on contemporary events. If she chimes in with the public mood, she stays. If she is at odds with the public mood, the editor releases her from her contract, it’s as simple as that. That’s not to say people weren’t wrong with registering their disgust with the nature of the article in question, and that organisations weren’t wrong with removing their advertising banners from the webpage. But there needs to be a little perspective here. We can’t go around punishing people who say things we don’t agree with or are offended by unless the nature of the comments made are so offensive and are set out to be deliberately offensive. Moir’s comments were typical reactionary, knee-jerk stuff which is broadly in line with the sneering nature of the Daily Mail’s editorial policy. However, she clearly didn’t check her facts and she just totally misread the public mood. She’s a fool and a silly cow but it’s not reasonable for those outraged to demand their pound of flesh. I agree with the view that pieces like Jan Moir’s column are excellent litmus tests for societal attitudes. Ten, even five years ago I would have expected that similar comments (and I can’t name any off the top of my head) were largely undetected/unchecked by the public but with a change in attitudes, 20,000 people felt strongly enough to complain.

And I agree that Moir doesn’t owe any apologies for her opinions – she is a columnist, her job is to pen a piece which gives her opinion on contemporary events. If she chimes in with the public mood, she stays. If she is at odds with the public mood, the editor releases her from her contract, it’s as simple as that.

That’s not to say people weren’t wrong with registering their disgust with the nature of the article in question, and that organisations weren’t wrong with removing their advertising banners from the webpage. But there needs to be a little perspective here. We can’t go around punishing people who say things we don’t agree with or are offended by unless the nature of the comments made are so offensive and are set out to be deliberately offensive. Moir’s comments were typical reactionary, knee-jerk stuff which is broadly in line with the sneering nature of the Daily Mail’s editorial policy. However, she clearly didn’t check her facts and she just totally misread the public mood. She’s a fool and a silly cow but it’s not reasonable for those outraged to demand their pound of flesh.

Report this comment to us

]]> By: Brian Burton http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/comment-page-2/#comment-79786 Brian Burton Thu, 29 Oct 2009 06:31:17 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/#comment-79786 What a couldren of opinion surrounding this person Jan Moir. She certainly knows how to sow seeds of discontent in a community. Of course, we need to get rid of any attempt by journalists or the church even to to project Gay people as depicted in Moir's article. The Moir's of this world will tend to brutalize the Gay concept itself, she is a 'poser' set in proes and nothing can cure the soul but the sences and nothing can cure the sences but the soul. What a couldren of opinion surrounding this person Jan Moir. She certainly knows how to sow seeds of discontent in a community. Of course, we need to get rid of any attempt by journalists or the church even to to project Gay people as depicted in Moir's article. The Moir's of this world will tend to brutalize the Gay concept itself, she is a 'poser' set in proes and nothing can cure the soul but the sences and nothing can cure the sences but the soul.

Report this comment to us

]]> By: AdrianT http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/comment-page-2/#comment-79768 AdrianT Thu, 29 Oct 2009 00:13:30 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/#comment-79768 Paul Mc cannot distinguish between a newspaper article, which called for harm against no one, and the invasion of Czechoslovakia. Just when I thought you could not be any more ridiculous, Paul Mc, you come back to surprise me. Tom: 'debate doesn't work'? OK, well why bother having elections then? Isn't that what the BNP would say, if they had the chance? How do you think the gay community gained support? it was through debate,. challenging people to look at the evidence. Not just marching and building barricades, which had their place too - in the face of real aggression. People such as Harvey Milk, debating christian fundamentalists to win over the people, ahead of a vote which would have banned gays from teaching. You take them on, you challenge them, through reason. The result of unchallenged prejudices: One million voters who already want to vote for the BNP, before the Question Time idea ever emerged. Statistics on muslim attitudes to homosexuals, The Observer survey of 27 October 2008; Even so, I don't need any surveys like that. Go and join up with a few football supporters' internet forums. See what is said, which cannot be said in print. Actually if you read the reports, the far right are up in arms, threatening a leadership contest. The atroceous Question Time performance shows people's inability to make a case against obnoxious opinions. First attempts are worst attempts. If you banish them, you push them underground. How else do you eliminate prejudices? You can take away their free speech by threat, but you tell people what to think. There is no other way to do that apart from reason. It's high time gay people grew up and made their case rather, than rushing like little spoilt children for the apron strings of the PCC, or even more ludicrously, the police, when they hear something they don't like. Paul Mc cannot distinguish between a newspaper article, which called for harm against no one, and the invasion of Czechoslovakia. Just when I thought you could not be any more ridiculous, Paul Mc, you come back to surprise me.

Tom: 'debate doesn't work'? OK, well why bother having elections then? Isn't that what the BNP would say, if they had the chance?

How do you think the gay community gained support? it was through debate,. challenging people to look at the evidence. Not just marching and building barricades, which had their place too – in the face of real aggression. People such as Harvey Milk, debating christian fundamentalists to win over the people, ahead of a vote which would have banned gays from teaching. You take them on, you challenge them, through reason.

The result of unchallenged prejudices: One million voters who already want to vote for the BNP, before the Question Time idea ever emerged. Statistics on muslim attitudes to homosexuals, The Observer survey of 27 October 2008; Even so, I don't need any surveys like that. Go and join up with a few football supporters' internet forums. See what is said, which cannot be said in print. Actually if you read the reports, the far right are up in arms, threatening a leadership contest. The atroceous Question Time performance shows people's inability to make a case against obnoxious opinions. First attempts are worst attempts.

If you banish them, you push them underground. How else do you eliminate prejudices? You can take away their free speech by threat, but you tell people what to think. There is no other way to do that apart from reason.

It's high time gay people grew up and made their case rather, than rushing like little spoilt children for the apron strings of the PCC, or even more ludicrously, the police, when they hear something they don't like.

Report this comment to us

]]> By: Paul Mc http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/comment-page-2/#comment-79762 Paul Mc Wed, 28 Oct 2009 23:06:40 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/#comment-79762 Jan Moir = odious column shot through with subliminal and non-subliminal homophobia. Adrian T = odious column from a quisling collaborationist apologist for homophobia under the guise of 'free speech means anything goes in the name of rational debate'. He knows no limits and would have hailed Chamberlain's Munich Agreement as the triumph of reason over prejudice. Jan Moir = odious column shot through with subliminal and non-subliminal homophobia.
Adrian T = odious column from a quisling collaborationist apologist for homophobia under the guise of 'free speech means anything goes in the name of rational debate'. He knows no limits and would have hailed Chamberlain's Munich Agreement as the triumph of reason over prejudice.

Report this comment to us

]]> By: Tom http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/comment-page-2/#comment-79761 Tom Wed, 28 Oct 2009 23:06:38 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/#comment-79761 This article starts off by saying "Homophobia breeds when we silence opinions we don’t like." An interesting premis, but it raises questions. How? Where is your evidence of this? Are there academic studies which prove it? I don't think so. It sounds nice, but it's just your opinion isn't it. You've quoted from a play (which is not a reflection of real life) of to back your point up. I'm sorry but your argument is unsupported and I disagree. Moir should not be allowed to publish such hateful tripe. Freedom of speech is vastly over-rated, and in the wrong hands, incredibly dangerous. That's my opinion. I keep hearing people reiterate how important it is to debate hateful ideas - that it's the only way to defeat them. Let's be realistic though. If you did any academic research you'd see that most people aren't persuaded by debate. They selectively hear the bits of an argument that support their point and disregard the rest. Debates just polarise most people. Support for the BNC actually went UP after Question Time. Debate doesn't work. Don't you think there was a reason why homophobes wanted to keep gay people in the closet and quiet for so long. It's because they knew that that was the best way to keep the hate going. And they had a point. Give an idea oxgyen - and there will always be people who believe it - no matter how bonkers. This article starts off by saying "Homophobia breeds when we silence opinions we don’t like." An interesting premis, but it raises questions. How? Where is your evidence of this? Are there academic studies which prove it? I don't think so. It sounds nice, but it's just your opinion isn't it. You've quoted from a play (which is not a reflection of real life) of to back your point up. I'm sorry but your argument is unsupported and I disagree.

Moir should not be allowed to publish such hateful tripe. Freedom of speech is vastly over-rated, and in the wrong hands, incredibly dangerous. That's my opinion.

I keep hearing people reiterate how important it is to debate hateful ideas – that it's the only way to defeat them. Let's be realistic though. If you did any academic research you'd see that most people aren't persuaded by debate. They selectively hear the bits of an argument that support their point and disregard the rest. Debates just polarise most people. Support for the BNC actually went UP after Question Time. Debate doesn't work. Don't you think there was a reason why homophobes wanted to keep gay people in the closet and quiet for so long. It's because they knew that that was the best way to keep the hate going. And they had a point. Give an idea oxgyen – and there will always be people who believe it – no matter how bonkers.

Report this comment to us

]]> By: Jonathan http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/comment-page-2/#comment-79730 Jonathan Wed, 28 Oct 2009 19:05:02 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/#comment-79730 Long live freedom of speech! It's great to see we have so many views and we can all express them, even saying how we can use aggressive language even on this comments page to say how we disagree with them and equate them to a mass murderer of innocent people who just happened to be cut unlike the great race of white uncut people. Of course, if we banned comments that were full of hate then comments pages like this would be banned too. Long live freedom of speech! It's great to see we have so many views and we can all express them, even saying how we can use aggressive language even on this comments page to say how we disagree with them and equate them to a mass murderer of innocent people who just happened to be cut unlike the great race of white uncut people.

Of course, if we banned comments that were full of hate then comments pages like this would be banned too.

Report this comment to us

]]> By: Rich http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/comment-page-2/#comment-79672 Rich Wed, 28 Oct 2009 12:46:49 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/#comment-79672 This woman is homophobic, plain and simple and her homophobic scribbling is unacceptable by any standards. This woman is homophobic, plain and simple and her homophobic scribbling is unacceptable by any standards.

Report this comment to us

]]> By: ekcol http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/comment-page-2/#comment-79648 ekcol Wed, 28 Oct 2009 08:12:53 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/10/26/comment-in-defence-of-jan-moir/#comment-79648 Yawn. Yet another idiot who can't tell the difference between criticising what someone says and denying them free speech. Yawn. Yet another idiot who can't tell the difference between criticising what someone says and denying them free speech.

Report this comment to us

]]>