Update

On a thread now locked.

The offensive fascist flags and portrait of a certain notorious fascist dictator have been removed from the parcel in Imelza. The owner of the land is no longer a member of a certain NASTY group, although the group still exists. The only other member listed openly was marching up and down outside when I got there. I was killed, LOL. For those of you who don't know, when you're killed your av lets out an aaagh - not that impressive really - I make more noise if I stub my toe hehe.

I think Lveran deserves a vote of thanks for bringing this to our attention. If you want to read the original thread, it's here: /327/52/192214/1.html

Are you telling us the Lindens are back ingame? Or have I missed the plot completely?

Did you blink? If so I think you missed it. Everything back to normal now.

Yes, tyranny and force being used to fight those we disagree with is pretty much the normal state of affairs in today's world.

Reasoned debate and the battle of ideas should never be allowed to happen.

Maybe you could start a group and call it Second life Tattlers And State Informers. STASI for short. Make it your goal to have half of the citizens informing on the other half.

You can't use Second Life in a group name. I've already AR'd you once today for being offended by the number 66. Don't make me inform on you a second time!

Oh, you struck Forum Gold on that one.

I'm a Jew - I find glorification of the Nazi regime offensive. I also find your post offfensive Chris Norse

Fine, then beat them in the arena of ideas, not thru censorship. I find communist items and pictures of Che offensive. But I don't call for them to be banned and outlawed. I have never claimed to be inoffensive.

As do many of us. But your right to be offended goes hand in hand with someones right to be offensive, as long as it does not harrass, impede or injure you in anyway.

Hhmm, Chris' post rather obviously supports freedom of thought and reasoned discourse, not Nazism. Are we to conclude, then, that you are so in favor of tyranny, force and censorship that you find opposition to them offensive, and/or that you are offended by reasoned discourse?

Any book incorporating Nazi symbolism should be burned.

Wait...what...?

Whilst I am no supporter of any force/organisation or government that support tyranny, or any form of coheres and brainwashing that results in any form of violence or applied stress, especially given the Nazi parties history. Alternatively, you cannot have a constitutional right for freedom of speech, on the basis of 'as long as you agree with it'.

It saddens my heart, when I read the atrocities that were forced and carried out on the Jewish, Kurd and Gipsy Nations, during the world wars, imposed and controlled by the Nazi party and feel a morally instilled to do what I can, to try and prevent such an event to every come about again. The sort of people that do support and are a part of this style of organisation, do not live with the same set of standards a large proportion of the remaining world, do, but that is a biased opinion.

Thanks Francesca, Thanks Lveram. There must be a limit to freedom of speech, anybody stating something else is a sympathisant or doesn't know a nazi-group.

Btw I'd AR a Stalin propaganda poster too ...

Ironically, that is a sentiment espoused by the very groups you seek to silence.

OMG Francesca, accidentally catching your toe on a door or piece of furniture when not wearing shoes is surely more painful than death itself? Honestly, I'd rather have the runs.

brenda: and where's your argument? You sure do not know any nazi-groups. Happy You, may it stay that way ...

What to do mean by "Know"? And my argument is you believe in "Limiting Free speech" which besides being an oxymoron, is the agenda favored by the very group you, and I for that matter, despise.

I mean you obviously do not have nazi groups in your neighbourhood and you do not have weekly violent actions of these groups against foreign people or just out of fun. It's very easy to talk about free speech in this situation. We're talking rl here, not rp!

Then arrest, try, and convict them for the violent actions. Talking, ranting, yelling, even insults are a far cry from the use of force against another.

We have our versions as well, along with, various other sociopathic groups running around. Including one particular group of people, who flew 2 airplanes into some buildings a couple of years ago, where quite a few friends, and one family member were killed. And they are all allowed to talk about their beliefs all they want as far as I am concerned. Condoning free speech does not condone violent action. If you are going to start arresting people for what hey say as to something illegal, then we all better hire lawyers. You are entitled to your beliefs and thoughts. Trying to deny someone else's cheapens that right in my opinion.

And I apologize for using a 9/11 reference, which is equal to Godwin's Law in my eyes.

As far as you're concerned maybe, but ask the guys in guantanamo etc. are they allowed to talk about their believes all they want?

Me too i dream of a free, ideal world. But as long as we're human, this will stay a dream. Even freedom must have its boundary. Thats the real world.



It depends where and to wich end you're using your right to free speech. Many if not all democratic countrys have laws against antidemocratic propaganda (don't know the correct term in ingl).



To that i agree, but i just don't know a better way to set a limit to this kind of group, you do?

The people confined in Guantanamo are considered prisoners , or detainees. (Whether that is accutrate or not is debatable) Prisoners speech and behavior is regulated by nature. Furtherly debateable is classification as POW's, whose conduct and rights are even more restricted. But judging by the Media storm that ensued when when it is was perceived that their right to practic etheir religion was being hindered and the scrambling that followed, I'd venture a guess as to their "rights' are similar with any other prisoner.

What democratic counrty has laws against atni democratic "propaganda" . That statement is a pure contradiction. You seem to favor free speech for only the "right" people?

You set a limit by creating clearly defined laws based on action, not thought. If you violate those laws you go to jail. Simple.

And I'm Irish, and likewise find glorification of England and The British Empire offensive, because members of my family lineage were crushed under their oppressive, unjust and unfair rule.

Of course, my people haven't had as much luck at banning images of the Union Jack, so I guess we just have to suck it up.

That's why God gave us Beer.....

I thought that was the Germans ..

Oh wait it was the Summerians.

NM - Gilgamesh isnt considered Broadly Offensive yet.