Freedom of speech in the UK?????

ronib

Next time spend even longer…MaizieD
Exactly what are you talking about? Kaszeta ? What exactly are you saying?

I think your comment about McCarthyite is outrageous.

I know you do.

But I think your comments about a respected chemical weapons expert being a possible security risk because he isn't a tory and has mildly criticised the government are even more outrageous.

Oh, and is he suspect because he's 'foreign', too?

You should listen to yourself.

ronib

NotSpaghetti well I think it’s pretty daft to be so clueless about Porton Down of all places!! I can’t believe what I am reading.

Where has he been openly speaking about Porton Down (or presented as a security risk)?

It's an international conference hosted by the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl) on behalf of the Ministry of Defence (MOD).

www.gov.uk/government/news/register-for-2023-chemical-weapons-demilitarisation-conference

The article- last paragraph - it’s the Ministry of Defence…. Not the Conservative Party? How very confusing.

If it is a Tory conference then they have a right to choose who they have as speakers. If it is a general scientific conference then they should not cancel a speaker if he just happens to disagree with them but has good credentials as a scientist. Not hard to work out, really.

Next time spend even longer…MaizieD
Exactly what are you talking about? Kaszeta ? What exactly are you saying?

I think your comment about McCarthyite is outrageous.

ronib

Maizie D maybe sit down and have a little think before you write.

I did.

I think you might be as well to take your own advice.

I would suspect that as an expert in chemical weapons Kaszeta has had a fair amount of interaction with Porton Down in the past.

Maizie D maybe sit down and have a little think before you write.

There seems to be a distinct McCarthyite flavour to your view, ronib

NotSpaghetti well I think it’s pretty daft to be so clueless about Porton Down of all places!! I can’t believe what I am reading.

A government that regards any member of a different political party, and any expression of criticism of it, as a 'security risk' seems to me to be one that has gone far down the road of extreme paranoia and repression.

I want you to take that job now fanny, I believe in you

ronib

Lots of comments make me think that you are all blissfully unaware and uninformed when it comes to issues surrounding government security. Just as well you don’t run any aspect of it.

Yes, it a bloody good job that I’m not in charge of security for the government.
I know that they have form for promoting people beyond their level of competence; but that would take the biscuit

But common place tactic, they used that in the universities too, these dangerous people with their dangerous thoughts.

A bit rude ronib.

Lots of comments make me think that you are all blissfully unaware and uninformed when it comes to issues surrounding government security. Just as well you don’t run any aspect of it.

Very childish and petty of the party.
I hate this word, but it’s a bit snowflakey, isn’t it?

I agree with them on stopping no platforming in universities, there have been some successful legal cases against no platforming lately.
I use this example frequently, I am a supporter of a womans right to choose, involved in an organisation that supports that, it's probably the belief that has been most consistent throughout my life, yet I can cope with the fact that some people hold different views on abortion.

I had forgotten about that Galaxy
🙄

They also made a big thing about trying to ensure de platforming doesn't happen in universities so it just looks ridiculous.

I’m not on Twitter and never will be. From my observations it appears to cause an awful lot of trouble, which is exactly why I keep off it.

He is right about people being uninvited though - and not alone!

bylinetimes.com/2023/04/26/cancelled-from-a-civil-service-talk-for-retweeting-a-liz-truss-parody-account/

I heard him speaking on the radio the other day about this.
It wasn't that he failed to understand that the people criticized have an equal right to respond.

He was clearly switched-on about choices governments are free to make and that they choose who to invite. He was, he said, sad that they were cutting off some great minds (not specifically him)... he was disappointed that they were choosing to un-invite people for reasons nothing to do with their specialism. He was saying that, as an academic his interest at a conference would be unrelated to any differences he might have with (say) the Rwanda deal.

I thought it was very strange that any government would cut off people they might benefit from.

Jackiest

You will never learn anything if you only listen to people who agree with you.

As we on GN know so well!

"Yes. I have criticized the government. So what? I am allowed to do so".
" I have rights to freedom of speech under human rights laws".

Time and again it baffles me that there are people who claim their - undoubted! - right to free speech, and yet fail to understand that the people they have criticized have an equal right to respond.

Call me a Tory and I will call you out to pistols at dawn in Hyde Park but I agree with GSM -their conference, their decision.