Shootings and explosions in Paris

[Liep]

You don't think it's a problem to limit speech that is merely offensive?

[Liep]

Worst of all, a police dog has reportedly been killed during the raid

[Martinus]

You don't think it's a problem to limit speech that is merely offensive?

With respect to non-resident foreigners? No, I don't think so.

Freedom of speech is not a human right, it is a civil right, and while it should not be restricted for citizens and lawful residents, the state should be free to limit it for visitors. That's no different than the right to vote, for example.

[Richard Hakluyt]

These are public events, people are not free to shout whatever they feel like. It is fairly routine to fine European football clubs if their fans misbehave :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22513780

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/mar/27/dynamo-kyiv-fined-fans-racist-abuse-everton-players

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2012/jun/19/euro-2012-croatia-fined-racism

Just the top 3 search results there.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

So, apparently, all European league football games this week are starting with a minute of silence for the victims.

In two games so far supporters of Turkey and Bosnia-Hercegovina, respectively, ignored that by whistling and shouting "Allahu Akbar". garbon will tell us if this is more or less classy than Charlie Hebdo...

This has been standard practice by Turkish supporters, but not for Bosnians.
Albanians, despite being 2/3 muslim (in theory) don't do that.

they might as well be shouting 'Sieg Heil' as far as I'm concerned.

[garbon]

Anyway, it's no different than Westboro Baptist Church being denied an entry into the UK because of the offensive stuff they are going to say.

I don't think freedom of speech should extend to any form of expression (irrespective of form and contex) by non-citizen non-residents visiting the country. 

I prefer idiots come and say idiotic things in person. Makes it easier for people to see how stupid they are. Like when WBC came to New York and they managed to get a measly 3 of them to arrive / there were more police surrounding them than their actual supporters.

[garbon]

These are public events, people are not free to shout whatever they feel like. It is fairly routine to fine European football clubs if their fans misbehave :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22513780

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/mar/27/dynamo-kyiv-fined-fans-racist-abuse-everton-players

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2012/jun/19/euro-2012-croatia-fined-racism

Just the top 3 search results there.

Surely there is a difference though between that and deportation? I'm not saying people should be able to say whatever they like, whenever they like with no consequences - just that deportation seems a bit strong for the case Marti brought up.

[garbon]

Wow, well I'm glad I'm from the land of the free. I may not like that speech but I don't think shouting "Allahu Akbar" rises to the level of meriting a deportation.

Nice spin. 

I wasn't aiming for spin. Here's an amended version.

Wow, well I'm glad I'm from the land of the free. I may not like that speech but I don't think whistling and shouting "Allahu Akbar" during a moment of silence for people killed by Islamic terrorists rises to the level of meriting a deportation.

[Richard Hakluyt]

These are public events, people are not free to shout whatever they feel like. It is fairly routine to fine European football clubs if their fans misbehave :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22513780

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/mar/27/dynamo-kyiv-fined-fans-racist-abuse-everton-players

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2012/jun/19/euro-2012-croatia-fined-racism

Just the top 3 search results there.

Surely there is a difference though between that and deportation? I'm not saying people should be able to say whatever they like, whenever they like with no consequences - just that deportation seems a bit strong for the case Marti brought up.

I agree with you. What I am saying is that there is a procedure for bad behaviour at football matches which should be applied in these instances, just as it has been applied in the past to similar cases.

[Tamas]

These are public events, people are not free to shout whatever they feel like. It is fairly routine to fine European football clubs if their fans misbehave :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22513780

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/mar/27/dynamo-kyiv-fined-fans-racist-abuse-everton-players

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2012/jun/19/euro-2012-croatia-fined-racism

Just the top 3 search results there.

Yeah Marty though is not calling for UEFA fines, but rather to pick them out of the crowd on the spot, put them on a bus, and dump them on the other side of the border. Because they said something aholish.

I wonder if he was this quick to punish non-conformist expressions or acts if he himself had a lifestyle that wasn't widely approved by the society he lives in. 

[Martinus]

Well, I am a citizen and a resident so not sure how that's comparable, Tamas.

But in the spirit of compromise, I will concede this to you - any foreigners coming from a Muslim country, where I could go and be openly gay and atheist, and express my views in public with impunity should be free to come to Europe to shout Allahu Akbar at football games. Deal?

[Martinus]

I will reiterate - freedom of speech and expression are not universal human rights, they are civil/political rights. They are meant for participants in the public life of the polity, allowing them to exchange ideas. Someone who is not a member of the polity can have these rights restricted as the polity sees fit.

Moreover, limiting the right of expressing views that directly attack the fundamental principles of the polity (such as, for example, expressing totalitarian or fundamentalist views in a polity built around the principles of pluralism) is not just the right, but the duty of the polity. One of the most misguided ideas of certain portions of modern left is that one should tolerate intolerance.

[grumbler]

they might as well be shouting 'Sieg Heil' as far as I'm concerned.

*Godwin proximity alert sounds*

[Martinus]

Godwin's law doesn't apply if an ideology is worse than nazism. Islamism is.

[grumbler]

I will reiterate - freedom of speech and expression are not universal human rights, they are civil/political rights. They are meant for participants in the public life of the polity, allowing them to exchange ideas. Someone who is not a member of the polity can have these rights restricted as the polity sees fit.

Moreover, limiting the right of expressing views that directly attack the fundamental principles of the polity (such as, for example, expressing totalitarian or fundamentalist views in a polity built around the principles of pluralism) is not just the right, but the duty of the polity. One of the most misguided ideas of certain portions of modern left is that one should tolerate intolerance.

I'm sorta wondering why you think you get to establish which rights are human rights and which are civil rights. Your Eastern European authoritarian worldviews are not really compatible with Western values.  Maybe you should sit this one out and learn a little bit about what the West values and how it sees individual rights before you start spouting here about what is and isn't a civil or human right and what those rights are "meant" to do.