Democracy, as practiced in the US and Great Britain, is grounded in freedom of speech, a right which many would argue the barometer of true liberty. A political minority's ability to argue against the prevailing government's policies without fear of punishment, is paramount to the success of democracy. There is a dark side to this freedom though.
Here is an article quoting a British MP, and advisor to Prime Minister Tony Blair, who publicly claims that "Pressure was put on Tony Blair before the invasion. The way it works is that pressure is put on people to arrive at certain decisions. It is part of the Zionist plan and it is shaping events."
Ahmad Thomson also claimed in his book 1994 book that the Holocaust was a "big lie" and Freemasons and Jews control the governments of Europe and the US. Now, according to the first principles of democracy, freedom of speech is sacrosanct, so even inane statements such as Mr. Thomson's are protected, but there is at least one appropriate censure: the British voter's who elected Thomson should recall him immediately. He may be free to spout his execrable beliefs, he has no protect right to serve in parliament.
Here is an article quoting a British MP, and advisor to Prime Minister Tony Blair, who publicly claims that "Pressure was put on Tony Blair before the invasion. The way it works is that pressure is put on people to arrive at certain decisions. It is part of the Zionist plan and it is shaping events."
Ahmad Thomson also claimed in his book 1994 book that the Holocaust was a "big lie" and Freemasons and Jews control the governments of Europe and the US. Now, according to the first principles of democracy, freedom of speech is sacrosanct, so even inane statements such as Mr. Thomson's are protected, but there is at least one appropriate censure: the British voter's who elected Thomson should recall him immediately. He may be free to spout his execrable beliefs, he has no protect right to serve in parliament.
Comments