James O'Brien mocks the racists when dissecting their meaning of 'free speech' | LBC
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 พ.ย. 2022
- James O'Brien mocks the racists when dissecting their meaning of 'free speech'
This video clip is from an LBC show presented by James O'Brien on 30/11/22.
Listen to the full show on Global Player: l-bc.co/ListenNow
#JamesOBrien #FreeSpeech #LBC
LBC is the home of live debate around news and current affairs. We let you join the conversation and hold politicians to account.
Subscribe for more: l-bc.co/subscribe
The latest videos from LBC: l-bc.co/Latest
Listen live to LBC on Global Player: l-bc.co/ListenNow
Nick Ferrari’s latest show: l-bc.co/3biHVvM
James O’Brien’s latest show: l-bc.co/3ONyPVI
Shelagh Fogarty’s latest show: l-bc.co/3JkNEha
Join in the conversation and listen at www.lbc.co.uk/
Sign up to LBC’s weekly newsletter here: l-bc.co/signup
Like, follow and subscribe to LBC!
Website: lbc.co.uk
Facebook: lbc
Twitter: / lbc
Instagram: / lbc
This is not your ordinary talk radio stream. LBC is the leading TH-cam channel for live debate around the news and current affairs. We have live interviews and debates and you can even phone in to join in the conversation.
![[FULL EP.01] LOL: Last One Laughing Thailand Thailand หัวเราะทีหลังปังกว่า | Prime Thailand](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/t4KunBRKn3s/mqdefault.jpg)
Whenever I hear someone moaning "you can't say anything anymore"... I always ask them "what is it that you'd like to say, that you feel you're not allowed to?" and I've never gotten an answer.
everyone gangster until....
Because it’s not something they’ve got the spine to say in-person. It’s always the same. These folks just want to be mean without any recourse.
"These days you get arrested and thrown in prison just for saying you're English, these days!"
I tell them that they are always free to say whatever they want , but there's always implications in all verbal communication, and also no verbal communication bizzare people and thier egos.
Gotten? I bet you say "soccer" as well.
To be honest, they're not complaining about freedom of speech. They're complaining about freedom of speech WITHOUT CONSEQUENCES. There, in the lack of consequences, is where their privilege resided.
You also have freedom of speech with no consequences,why can’t you have an opinion which isn’t popular with everyone?isn’t that the point?
@@dvvecchio7193 everyone has freedom of speech with consequences.
@@dvvecchio7193 so what you're saying is that you want to be able to say whatever you want with no consequences.... which effectively means that no one can say anything negative about what you've said. So you believe in freedom of speech when it applies to you... but don't believe the people who disagree with you have the same freedom of speech rights? I mean... the hypocrisy is unreal. Freedom of speech also means you can say what you want without fear of reprisals from the government or law. It doesn't mean you can say what you want and no one can voice their disdain of what you've said. It's just entitled hypocrisy
The J O'b guide to what is allowed and permissable in 'Free Speech' Nice!
@@dvvecchio7193 You have freedom of speech, but words always carry responsibility. The same goes for unpopular opinions. Freedom and responsibility always go hand in hand.
Here in Australia, when our RWNJ conservatives wanted to undo protections for race, disability, hate and other discrimination, some brave people asked "what do you WANT to say, that you CAN'T currently?" and of course, there was no answer. The laws stayed. Luckly we had the opportunity to bounce those clowns out of Govt this year.
Yep, same with the "religious freedom" bill beloved by those same RWNJs. Religious people weren't facing discrimination themselves, but wanted the legal protections to discriminate against others! Thank goodness we finally got those clowns out after 9 loooong years in power.
No, those are just lies that your favorite tabloid news journalists say over and over until you believe them to be true. The big question is WHY you would ever trust a tabloid news publication or channel
Amazing! ☺️
Now... If only the brave people of Britain were as brave as Australia's brave people.
I definitely don’t support the views of these RWNJ’s don’t get me wrong, but if he would have answered the journalist question wouldn’t that disprove his own statement? So for him it’s probably the smartest reaction that was possible
@North London Thanks so much. Many parts of Australia are already ex-London ghettos, where people complain endlessly about Londonistan and why all the Mussies (sp?) are following them to Australia.
Freedom of speech entails freedom of reply. Those who shout the loudest about 'freedom of speech' demand all the privileges of the former without ever having to defend themselves against the latter. They can hurl any amount of abuse at anybody and if their target(s) object, they will shout "Snowflake!", but if any criticism is aimed at them, they burst into tears and cry " Foul!" Don't they Piers? Nigel..?
Or "Madame Speaker! It sounded like the Labour member was threatening me when she said I wouldn't say that outside after I hurled a load of abuse at her!"
I've heard that the NHS can't handle an influx of Snowlfakes this winter and they will all be dead by the summer. Shouting their name won't save them, action is needed.
exactly, but leftists never had a sense of sincerity anyway, so thats just the way they are ! ! well said
hes talking about extreme lefists like james
Talk about throwing the baby out with the bath water!
YOU can say many things that would cause you problems. Because your audience would hold you accountable and condemn your statements. The problem is that there are many people whose audiences and ideologies either don't hold people accountable for atrocities, or worse - celebrate them.
This reminds me of when I talked to my kid’s friend’s parent, who started whining about how Florida has been “free” this whole time (with regards to the pandemic), compared to Illinois… So I asked him “what can you do in Florida (in reference to pandemic protocols), that you can’t do in Illinois?” To which he stuttered for a minute and blurted out “you don’t have to wear masks”, to which I responded, “masks are a choice in Illinois too”… to which he went on a rant questioning the efficacy of masks 🙄. That was his attempt to brag about how right wing states some how promote “freedom” more than left wing states. What he didn’t acknowledge however is that more than double the amount of Republicans died of covid compared to Democrats…
I highly recommend every conservative to exercise their freedom of dying from easily preventable causes.
@@tappajavittu I think they already are. Apparently out of all the Covid deaths in the US, there were double the amount of conservative to liberals, and it's no surprising to find out why. Ironically, conservative politicians are literally killing their own voters.
@@tappajavittuhere here!
Say "free Palestine" 🇵🇸 and see what happens.. Jeremy corbyn said it and they labelled him.
What’s Palestine
@@johnou.k.3780 haha. Its never going to be forgotten, im afraid
@@johnou.k.3780 Maybe you should educate yourself.
@@davidcolin6519 I don’t acknowledge terrorist
@@johnou.k.3780 you seem to have mixed up a variety of political and religious groups with either a population or a geographical area, strange... unless it's willful...
Most people confuse freedom of speech with freedom of consequences for speech.
'I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death of your right to say it'.
That's freedom of speech 👍
But freedom of speech does mean freedom from some consequences. That’s what makes it freedom.
@@davidgraham8058 Sure...if you're 5 years old. Mature adults understand there are limits as to time, place, context etc.
Everything has consequences....everything
@@manbearpig7359 Yes, but by definition it entails freedom from certain consequences. If the consequences are you will be demonised by ideologues, physically abused or beaten, lose your job, cancelled, even put in jail for expressing your opinion, then in what sense is it free speech?
I think you mean freedom _from_ consequences of speech
Some folk ignore how their right to free speech is the same right enjoyed by others to roundly dismiss, debunk or mock the ideas they express
They aren't debunked or mocked though, they are simply censored and shut down. Present information on disproportionate power from those of a Levantine background and see how far you get.
@@AleXoEx0 now what power do you think these people have, go ahead name it, is it the same power that those of a Anglo Saxon has that has a lot of money , or are they okay to have a disproportionate amount of power?
@@mikeaskme3530 If anglo saxons make up over 80% of a society and you find them in positions of power then that is normal. They are likely represented as you would find them in society. If however you have another group making no more than 2% of the total population but are often represented at over 50% of finance media and academic institutions, there is likely something going on with overt in group preference and promotion of their own - operating as a group rather than merit. If on top of this these institutions are used to morally corrupt the society and financially enslave the population, then you have a very bad problem indeed.
@@AleXoEx0 its 2022 and you still believe jews run the world lol? Atleast move onto being an anti vaxxer or a more modern conspiracy theory
@@reevs2153 have you seen joe bidens cabinet, trump's too lol? Have you seen how AIPAC (Jewish funded political bloc) themselves boasted on twitter that over 90% of all candidates in the 2022 mid terms were Zionists and back Israel fully? Was it not the jewess Barbara Roche of the 1990s Blair government that open up Britain to the world's immigrants? It's almost hard not to see the political and media dominance of Jewish groups in the west. The question is what can be done about it.
this man is the only reason i can listen to LBC
Me.too
We love him because he tell the truth about all people
Me too omfg
The people shouting the loudest actually want freedom of stupidity.
One of the things annoying some people the most is that they think their freedom of speech is violated if somebody refuses to publish their "speech".
We are mostly free to speech but nobody is forced to listen or repeat it.
That's what's the block features are for on social media.
It's just like if you don't want to hear someone's opinion on TV. Change the channel. It's not complicated.
@@lamestreammedia3154Facebook , and tik tok and Twitter don't really allow for that kiddo. And how do you expect us to cure a disease we are unaware of? Not only do we need to see and hear it when it comes, we need to keep winning this war on hate filled bigots and fools so we can one day be rid of their influence. Than we won't have to look away or pretend because those people will be gone or at least their rhetoric will be 😚
@@scottblack7182 well kiddo. If you don't like far-right platforms go and build your own.
Free speech usually means my speech, not yours. It is a vague concept that sounds great until followed to its conclusion.
Just like “fairness” it is a local concept.
Freedom of Speech can’t also mean protection from offence by the speech of others. It has to be the freedom of making verbal blows on each other
@@johnrussell3961 you, sir, are a nitwit.
Oh look at that, it seems I can still challenge people.
well freedom of speech isn't just the right to be heard, its the right to listen.. by stopping others from speaking you're basically saying you don't trust others to be able to deal with what they are hearing..
A high proportion of Pakistanis in the UK demand that the UK have the death penalty for blasphemy like Pakistan does.
@@johnrussell3961 Just a note. We shouldn't have to save people from being offended. Being flat out bigoted in anyway isn't okay, but I think Jordan Peterson put it best when he said 'In order to think we have to risk being offensive'
Offence is completely subjective while also being your choice to accept.
Just laugh at the idiots and they tend to disappear.
I’m in Rhode Island USA and in my opinion you are someone that should always be cheered to the rafters.
Imagine not understanding you can get slapped for what you say and it's understandable.
Imagine not understanding that Xi Jinping would like to shake your hand.
Imagine not understanding that this leads to inequality something you claim to oppose
Freedom of speech includes hate speech however it does not protect you from the consequences of such speech.
You say Freedom of Speech, I say Responsibility of Opinion. You can't have the former without the latter and if you have full freedom to say what you like, you get no right to complain when someone decides you are no longer welcome due to things you say.
And what about facing legal action for effectively voicing an opinion. Anyone is entitled to refuse somebody's welcome but when it is a state that is a different matter.
@@simonmorgan225 out of interest, what legal action for what opinion voiced where?
@@simonmorgan225 If you know the law and protest you know that you are breaking the law and that there will be consequences. You may then choose to act anyway, knowing full well that you put yourself at risk
@@garethaethwy count dankula was convicted for a joke. A girl was convicted for posting lyrics from a rap song. Amazing how many people are against FoS. Oh and Dank is in Scotland the girl is in England.
@@seekingsomething9026 of course you have the exact texts of said ‘joke’ and lyrics? Because describing those words as you do does not in and of themselves rule out an offence.
I once had a manager who encouraged people to use their initiative... but only when he instructed them to do so. It's a similarly flawed logic.
There's a difference between freedom of speech and hate speech, both tempered by the venue being public or private...
Here's the list of things 'Freedom of Speech' actually protects you from:
Consequences or punishment for criticising your government.
Here's what it doesn't protect you from:
Consequences or criticism for saying literally anything else!
From how I've been taught, it prevents the _government_ punishing you.
Your neighbour can get aggrieved all they like. And I do.
Punishment from the state is all you'd be cleared from. If certain people despise you for criticisms you made of the government, they can punish you in some way such as depriving of you job opportunities, stop being friends with you etc.
Too many are focused on their “freedom of” or “right to” whatever, & give no thought at all about their responsibilities. You can’t have one without the other.
Champions of freedom of speech usually means freedom of speech for themselves and those who think like them!
Which "champions"?
Example please?
Champions of speech restriction always means freedom of speech for themselves and those who think like them!
Champion just meant people, if you can’t figure that out maybe go back to bed.
When people defend their stance on something with freedom of speech, they're basically saying that the BEST reason to justify that stance is that it's not literally illegal to have it.
Literary nobody defends any stance with a FOS argument, its when people try to de-platform and ensure legal consequences it arises
@@graemebuchan1919 You've never heard people respond to criticism of their views with "that's my opinion!"?
@North London Even in matters of opinion, you'll often find that one person's opinion is a lot better informed and reasoned.
@@django3422 with the free speech hating from many in the comments it wouldn't surprise me if you wanted opinions to be illegal.
@@seekingsomething9026 Why, is that your kneejerk reaction whenever someone is critical of something?
Freedom of speech does NOT mean freedom from consequence.
In the USA freedom to believe does not include freedom to act on those beliefs, if they are illegal.
It's a qualified right which means it cannot cross lines.
depends where the consequences come from.. it its from the state then they would be a violation of free speech...
I've never understood what people mean by this. Surely freedom of speech means freedom from prosecution
Lol and i can see you advocating to hang people who disagree with you in your recent comments 😂😂😂 lefties are all the way down the authoritarian rabbit hole
Free speech in a private forum vs free speech in a public forum is a huge differentiation. Freedom to criticize the government (and royalty - what a joke) in a public forum should always be protected. Personal opinion expressed in a private forum may be limited by the owner of the private forum. I reserve the right to ask someone to leave my home if I find their speech offensive. I should not be arrested for questioning the legitimacy of a “king” in a public street.
Absolutely.
And if you are, Magna Carta means nothing and freedom in Britain has not advanced one whit in 807 years.
Private media companies are protected against prosecution for offensive speech.
Their defence is they are a platform not a publisher
Think of it like a retail shop. They sell newspapers though are not accountable for what the newspapers print.
A media company cannot claim to be a platform, then proceed to choose what people say. They then become a publisher.
These media companies want the best of both worlds. They should choose, platform or publisher. I don't have a preference either way.
@@lamestreammedia3154 great explanation.
Freedom of speech is usually confused with freedom from being challenged on the views being expressed.
Yeah... Strange one that aye? When one purports to uphold freedom of speech, but when others exercise their freedom of speech to challenge them, the house of cards comes tumbling down!!!
Ultimately, when the Far Right starts arguing "freedom of speech", what they REALLY mean is:
I want to be able to say what the F*CK I like and NOT be challenged!
Mmmm... That sounds a bit one sided if you ask me! And not quite... Free!
@DoubtingThomas what exactly IS anti-trans?
@DoubtingThomas no, it’s not. Please explain. If you need time to consult with your favorite tabloid news journalists, I’ll give you some time.
@DoubtingThomas if it’s so obvious, then why can’t you define it? I think the problem is that you haven’t figured out your believing what TABLOID news journalists tell you as being fact. Keep in mind, I was once under their spell.
@@gregkasza1925 No. You're disengenuous.
Freedom carry's responsibility's, but responsibility is something that those who shout about freedom won't accept.
The early wave from Idiot’s Corner! That’s freaking brilliant!!!!! 🔥🔥🔥
The question that generally seems to shut these people up is "what is it that you want to say, but you feel you're not able to?". Almost invariably, I'm met with complete silence.
Started listening today and am impressed
This was absolutely brilliant. Just perfect.
Freedom of speech, is seen by some to be able to say what you want about anything or anyone, and is defended mainly by those who want to use that freedom to disparage or insult others. However, if that freedom were to be extended to exist as they wish, one day might be used against them in some way. Then I'm sure it would become unacceptable.
Who was it who was able to convince you that freedom of speech is a bad thing?
@@gregkasza1925 Exactly. I suspect that he didn't need a lot of convincing as we know far left zealots see free speech as an inconvenience at best, and at worst hate speech depending on who is doing the speaking and the subject. And here we see identity allowing different levels of free speech. Yet they accuse us of exactly what they are guilty of. Hypocrisy be there name.
@@andrewmnr057 it is astonishing. It’s my belief that the left is addicted to tabloid news journalism ( Cnn, msnbc). Even Hollywood who should understand what that is, keep falling for it.
@@gregkasza1925 it amazes me how many people hate free speech and lie about why people believe in the concept.
@@seekingsomething9026 I think it’s because tabloid news journalists convince them, and they no idea they are watching tabloid news journalists.
Its more about who gets to set the moral compass ? We are getting to the point where we dismiss facts just because someone is offended this is ridiculous and very dangerous
The people who spout about “their” freedom of speech do so without personal responsibility.
because there is a question of autonomy.. if I say X and someone thinks I mean Y and acts on it.. who has autonomy in that situation?
@@elcristoph7380 You need to think about what you say ? And apologse if it is misunderstood, clarify what you meant which was not offensive. And I do not mean "taken out of context" or "apologise for any offense taken"
Which is a bit ironic, considering that those constantly crowing about their freedom of speech, when talking of the poor or disenfranchised, consistently criticize the downtrodden as suffering from a lack of "personal responsibility".
@@craven5328 Throughout history the people who had their right to free speech taken away were the downtrodden.
Id also point out that taking a level of personal responsibility goes a long way..
Always have. And your point is?
They’re actually promoting “free screech.”
...nice try...but didn't quite work..
@@chatham43 really? I think it's quite accurate.
@@chatham43 It does, you can "perfectly" imagine a society where it's allowed to say, claim, or yell anything about anything or anyone. As mentioned, that goes from snake oil salesmen to shouting fire where there is none, to accusing random people of crimes you know they didn't commit, and to promoting any ideology. This society would be a nightmare, but it's a possible ideal for some people (especially pro-gun, religious extremists that think they are given a holy mission and that believe that if you shoot or shout faster it means you are right)
But they were so upset when Biden called them Facists and Hillary called them Deplorables
James is out of touch. I usually agree with him, I'm not a Tory, far from it, but he is out of touch
Phone into his show and put him in his place
@@thedoctor007dfw Thing is Tom, he doesn’t like that. He’ll fade you out live on air, just to show his adoring acolytes how intellectually superior and right he is. Sad thing is, many of his adoring sycophants here believe him. Imagine that eh?
@@nick1065 Irony of it is, he's doing it to put on a radio show to make money.
You have probably contributed more money to LBC through commenting on his videos than I ever will as someone who agrees with him on most things.
So the way he engages his audience is working for him. I'm sure James is ecstatic that you support his channel with over 1,000 comments.
And understand, freedom of speech does not provide freedom from being held accountable for what you say.
Wish we had more men of integrity like u Mr. O'Brian. I see the entire World seeing harrassment and not say a word. But u speak up. Bless u.
I loved the way James said a "52/48" split in his audience without specifying whether he thought the 52% would be on his side or the people he'd offended.
Let's have a Non Binding Advisory Referendum, and find out. I don't think JOB would like the result, though.
Whenever you hear someone say,"Can we/I say it now?", you know that you are dealing with a person who honestly does not care about the negative impact of their words AND that they have been waiting for the opportunity to be absolved of all consequences for their words that may be heading their way. Such a person is neither an ally nor a friend. They are feckless and reckless, and should be avoided especially around any and all recording devices that could incriminate oneself via mere association.
That’s the beauty of allowing people with terrible views to be able to express those views freely without punishment from the government and law.
If those people didn’t express those views because they’d be arrested or fined, you’d still be around them!
You’ve made the case for freedom of speech, not against.
I love how people who say, "You can't say anything anymore!" always feel completely comfortable to spout any ignorant thing that crosses their minds. I love it, and by that, I mean I hate it.
Lol.. James I'm with you on what could you say to your boss??.. I think most people probably think that most days!🙄😏🤣🤣
What is "grave offence"? How can feeling offended ever be descrbed as "grave"?
Free speech for everyone ... as long as they agree with me.
Indeed. Jobby’s all in favour of free speech when it suits his narrative. Anything else is faded out…..
People just need to spread their madness and for some that madness is hate.
Hate seems sane to evil men.
I’ve always marvelled at people who want to exercise their right to abuse others. We all love free speech but spewing hateful vitriol, not sure anyone wants to hear it because most people prefer civility.
Freedom of speech is the opposite of the things Tories like.they can lie and you are not.
...explain that comment if you can.....
The conservatives of today in the U.K. are mostly socialists/liberals who are conservative in name only.
@@chatham43 I think she used a random word generator to form that sentence
Strange isn't it, because i get the feeling they think freedom of speech gives them the right to be offensive and abusive
Can't remember who said it, but "Freedom of Speech does not mean Freedom of Consequences"
Doesn't is depend on the consequence? It's an overly simplistic rebuttal. Shouldn't it mean "freedom from some consequences", in "some" cases. Given that talk of "free speech" originated in response to the authority of the state and church.
@@wolfnipplechips I get what you're saying but no, the phrase is all encompassing. Sometimes there may not be consequences for free speech, yes, but just because you are enacting your right to free speech doesn't mean you are free from any consequences there MAY be. And at any rate, this is a modern argument, free speech philosophy initially was about speaking out against authority or government without fear of being disappeared by said authority, it's not a tool for actors and celebs to use when they get called out on something contentious they've said.
@@stream_gene it’s situational, which is the root of the problem being discussed. I can think of situations where expressing an opinion should be free from any meaningful consequence. I think we all can. Absolutist pronouncements from either side of the argument is silly.
Unless the consequence is prosecution from the law, then it does.
@@wolfnipplechips I know, which is why I said "UNLESS the consequence is prosecution from the law, then it does".
Freedom of speech is NOT the freedom to offend, which seems to me really the issue here. People can say what they want but who would want a world where the same people did as they want, chaos would be the result.
I find your comment offensive. Now what?
@@captbuckyohare5585 would ask firstly what offends you about it. Let’s have a conversation
Is it hateful,Promoting violence or bullying?
Actually it is, being offensive is perfectly legal.
@@captbuckyohare5585 🤣 and you got a reply 🤣🤣🤣
one is pefectly free to be offensive actually
Questioning vaccines and big pharma should be allowed. Same goes for questioning things like immigration. We must always keep debates open. It’s when it becomes hate filled we need to question the levels of speech allowed.
"you can question stuff but not too much and you hate stuff don't say so, then the government should come and get you"
Most people who are constantly crying about their right to free speech, just want consequence free speech...
define consequences in the context of freedom of speech
More clips like this.
They seem to really rile up the goobers in the comments.
Oh yes….he shoots, he scores! What a zinger! We all should really know our place eh? Only those who agree can comment yesh? 😂
@@nick1065 oh, bless your lil heart.
I didn’t say you couldn’t say what you want.
I simply said it riles the goobers, like you, up something furious…and you’ve confirmed it.
Brilliant.
He shoots, he scores!
@@nick1065 You sookin' ?
@@joshuaDstarks self congratulation of one's own circular projected viewpoint
Goober yourself
You people are so easily led by the likes of James the sophist
@@vanrutgar6536 Another one that missed the point. 😂
Right wing libertarians who worship at the altar of free-market capitalism AND continually bleat about cancel culture without being able or willing to see the link between the two is like a vegan ordering a steak for dinner then having the brass neck to complain to the restaurant staff about it afterwards.
You always hear people on GB news (I'm not a regular viewer, I must stress that) complaining about " cancel culture". If cancel culture is a real thing and not just right wing fear mongering, how come GB news is still on the air?
It's a calamity.... hahhah
"In order to voluntarily and freely recognize and appreciate other people's virtues, one must have one's own". Arthur Schopenhauer
Layman's term... game recognizes game
"The early wave from idiots' corner" 🤣
Say what you want when you want. Simple.
Fine. But then be prepared to face & accept the consequences. Simple.
@@garethaethwy Thanks Gareth. Noted.
@@garethaethwy what do you think are reasonable consequences Gareth?
Because in some countries being jailed is seen as a reasonable consequence
I’ve had the same conversation with a now ex friend who was a brexiteer , who was very easy to close down on all the issues until he pulled that one out of the bag “ what about freedom of speech “ ! Until I asked him what it was he couldn’t say ! I never got an answer & it was the last time we spoke 2 years ago !
He couldn’t say it, you said it yourself.
I heartly agree.
Love your show James.
I'm not quite sure what Jamesy is getting at here. What did all that mean?
He’s just raging that when everyone has free speech none of his arguments have any chance of winning.
So he chooses dystopia for all of us instead.
Lots of triggered snowflakes in the comment section.
most of them agreeing with James..
@@elcristoph7380 I usually agree with Mr O’Brien, but I’m no snowflake.
@@Andyreally no one typically admits they're a snowflake..
Not that you were triggered, of course 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@leesmith-dennis4141
Of course not. What would I have been "triggered"(silly word outside the context of e.g. PTSD) by?
Well said thanks
“Idiot’s corner” love it
James spoke out in defence of Danny Baker after the 'awful thing' he did a few years back
How about "your rights end where mine begin" as a meaning for free speech?
What people consider to be their rights vary
some people think they have the right to not be offended
freedom of speech is not just for views you agree with
There should be no hate speech laws. Incitement to violence is a crime and that is enough
Thank you speaking the truth
Freedom to punch is great also
Little Tommy Ten-Names - brilliant!
As an American, our first amendment protects citizens from the government not from societal consequences.
“Thank you for the early wave from idiots corner” 😂
Free speech. It’s just words. Stop crying about people who offend you for saying something you don’t like or agree with.
Your statement couldn't be more ironic.
Congratulations 👏🏻 you’re apart of the problem with society and our children’s future
@@eve_l 100%! The comments section here is an irony jamboree. To a lot of people free speech means "no comebacks"
James conflates ( intentionally) outright abuse and honest debate. Discussing issues freely is the true value of free speech in an open society.
that's not what he said. Nothing was conflated.
@@k3v1n47 everything O’Brien says is conflated.
@@nick1065 Are you a child? That's what a child would say. Reason you see, doesn't work like that. Grow up or pipe down. Either one.
@@k3v1n47 it is
How often as he satirised the different people? Might they not be offended by that? He's a hypocrite.
Waar is de laatste reactie van James O’Brien te vinden over Harry en Meghan? Deze is wel te vinden op Instagram, maar niet op You Tube. Waarom?
Much love ❤️!
O'brien question - What could I say now. . . that would prompt such an enormous backlash that I'd be frightened to visit the same territory again?
Answer - "My definition of a woman is an adult female."
People called in to O'brien's show yesterday inviting him to say this quote . . . he declined to take their calls. He asks a rhetorical question to prove his point, then knowingly avoids facing the answer.
... because he's making a rhetorical point. That doesn't mean he's going to make a statement that he doesn't believe just for the sake of upsetting people.
I'm not sure what you think you're proving.
@@django3422 Because if he doesn't believe a woman is an adult female he believes a male can be a woman. Either way, he's frightened to express his opinion for fear of alienating a huge section of his audience (of whichever persuasion).
@@g.p616 He's not been quiet in his support of trans people so and doesn't care about "alienating" bigots in his audience sooo...
@@django3422 OMG! So you're saying James O'Brien doesn't believe the definition, "A woman is an adult female," to be a true statement! Is that right?
@@g.p616 I'm saying you can probably get an idea of his views on the matter from watching his content.
Zzzzzzzzz
Brilliant! Brilliant. Brilliant! 👏.
Freedom of speech is fine, however it has consequences. I draw the line at speech that directly calls for violence (incitement can be a grey area), and defamation. Also don’t agree with freedom of speech when it’s used to exploit children, such as under the guise of freedom of expression/art.
However, strongly disagree with James and what appears to be many people on the left on the point he made on vaccinations.
Having open dialogue about the vaccine was necessary. The main social media platforms blocked any speech regarding the origins of the covid virus. Despite the BBC actually doing an excellent documentary in 2020 about the likely origins (a lab) and the Chinese cover up when the spread of the virus was first known in Dec 2019. Considering how left the BBC is considered, if they can raise valid concerns..why can’t the public amplify and expand on them?
And how about the same platforms blocking points raised about the effectiveness of the vaccines as far as stopping the spread of the virus? Or the effectiveness of lockdown mandates that also cost lives. Lockdowns rules flouted by our own government!!
If we need a system where we flag speech as opinion rather then fact, ok so be it, but to stop it all together? How is conducive to an open and free society? It’s clearly not!
The BBC is right wing
they are run by tories
If JOB ever gets cancelled, it should be called an O'Brexit.
Groan..
Or O’Brussels.
With Freedom of Speech comes the Freedom to take the consequences. You can indeed say anything you like - just don't moan about it if it lands you in jail /shrug.
The problem now is that people want to say whatever they like and then get upset when the bill needs to be paid
spoken like a true sheep-person.
You have freedom of speech. But you do not have freedom from consequences.
Preach it.
define consequences in the context of freedom of speech
@Michael Parkinson's free Parker pen In the context of free speech, your words may cause harm or damage and there are consequences for doing do. For instance, you have the right to yell "Fire" in a crowed movie theater. But if there was no fire, and it was deemed to be false, you can get arrested and may serve time as a consequence.
@@SYN4456 Shouting fire in a theatre has nothing to do with free speech in the context of ideas
It would be malicious misinformation with the intent to trick a party into causing them harm or defrauding themselves
@Michael Parkinson's free Parker pen OK, I'll give a recent example: When Alex Jones went on his show Infowars and promoted a conspiracy theory that the 2012 mass shooting in a Connecticut elementary school was staged by crisis actors in order to justify the government taking away people’s guns, the parents of the kids killed sued him for defamation. The parents have said those lies led to a barrage of harassment and threats in the wake of the shooting, which left 20 children and six adults dead. Alex Jones consequences of his free speech was a lawsuit.
I genuinely love James and his thoughts on matters
James thank you for just being you... I always try to catch your rants.... I also have your books and completely agree with your philosophy... More power to your elbow
👏🤩🤔♥️
if in any doubt it's always safe to just talk about the weather ...just make sure it's the local weather ...hopefully they will not get too offended when the next person gets drawn into an in depth conversation.
Well said!!!!
Middle class narcissism at its finest 😂
"Middle class narcissism".
It's funny how the gamms' inverted snobbery suddenly evaporates when they're gushing about "salt of the earth" Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg.
@@voiskumbeaver3285 i
@@fensterfred I dont need to, we all know hes a hypocrite
Wish he would say something that would take him off air.
.......we can pray....but it all pays for his kids private education...😊
Yeah, lets cancel him because he said something you didn't like. You owe me a new irony meter.
@@minimoog4236 Tell you what chap, how about if I buy you a humour meter? Reckon you’ll need that more….
@@chatham43what point do you think you’re making here? And, hilariously, your comment is actually directly contributing to his salary 😂
@@wephilips6651 Well said Sir! We anti believers of O’Brien must know our place within this sacred echo chamber. It’s been said many times before, you can only comment if you agree with the Great One. Free speech anyone? 😂
"Muh freeze peach!!!"
Free of speech is anything you can say that you can prove to be true.
how can you prove an opinion to be true?
opinions are freedom of speech
Face on that
Haven't fully made up my mind on this one but is shouting "Fire" in a full theatre worse than stepping on someone's head/neck to escape that theatre? I would feel more responsible for standing on someone's neck personally. I didn't have to panic and scramble over others to escape that theatre, that was my choice. At what point does personal responsibility come into this?
Just what? You claiming my natural response to danger is my 'personal responsibility' compared to the person that caused that response? 🤔
A couple of problems here. Firstly, panic isn't a choice. By definition, it is uncontrollable.
Secondly, why do you need one to be better or worse than the other? The person shouting "fire" is responsible for any injuries or distress, by causing the situation in which those injuries occurred. If you stamp on someone to escape, you are also responsible for that specific injury. If you were legitimately panicking, then that responsibility is diminished.
Well is the hypothetical situation here not "shouting fire in a crowded theatre, when There Is No Fire??" You seem to have ignored the "when there is no fire" part of it.
If I was in a theatre and someone shouted fire, I would want to be pretty certain there was one before I took any extra-ordinary, in extremis measures to escape that fire. I would have a personal responsibility to determine if that person was telling the truth before I stood on someone's neck. Do you believe everything you hear?
Imagine that legal defence!
"Sorry officer, I just panicked and knifed that intruder"
"Ohhhh you panicked? Well in that case no harm done, no prison sentence for you old boy!!" 😆🤣
Something tells me you're not a lawyer!!
Personal responsibility began with shouting fire. Why would you think someone is not responsible for what they say?
Everything you say is the correct thing to say, there's a pattern emerging
I've a lot of issues regarding what the term 'free speech' means to different people, or people in different countries, or on different platforms such as social media.
USA for example, has many that equate it to their 1st Amendment, while also thinking it applies to posts on all social media platforms.
Hussey's behaviour is just another example of how people from that out-dated household think
James, try criticising the LGBTQ community!! Lets see how that goes
Love this guy!!
James ? is this your alt account :)
Me too
freedom of speech doesn't = freedom from responsibility
define responsibility in the context of freedom of speech
We love him because he tell the truth about all people