Excellent article.
Freedom of the Press is important in a free society.
The Bill of Rights and The U.S. Constitution are correct.
Words to live by:
“I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it’.
Evelyn Beatrice Hall

If the US followed the lead of the UK, and removed ridicule from TV political commentary, then MSNBC would need to cancel its entire evening lineup.

This is news? The U.K. doesn’t a first amendment. Given all the debt talk and partisan mud slinging, this article makes me grateful to live in the U.S.

It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words…Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought?   In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.

1984

Why is maddow not getting the wall to wall coverage she so deserves in regards to her lawsuit? Has there even been one post? Isn’t she part of the media?

Good for them. Stewart is nothing but a lying shill for left wing politics. 

Treating parliament differently does also have a lot of benefits. It meant that the superinjunction regarding ryan giggs was broken through parliamentary priviledge, and that difficult questions can be asked in parliamentary commities without fear of legal reprisal.

If you only focus on the differences, include the good stuff as well as the bad. Our legal requirement for news channels to be impartial for example prevents such bias as fox and msnbc, and by banning these videos we ensure we pay attention to the relative merits and flaws in argument, rather than jus ttaking the piss, which really do enough of here in the uk already.

I would love to hear from modern-liberals who call conservative/libertarian dire predictions about the road to surfdom with a larger government the slippery slope fallacy.  Here are 3 very modern, very democratic countries with outright political censorship of speach.  Not to mention Canada’s huge censorship laws about saying anything they don’t agree, or for mearly appearing on a college campus and saying something that is pro freedom.  If we follow Europe in this, like we do most everything else, free speach will be greatly hindered.

Fortuante as it is…
The Constitution this country is founded on..will never be the UK..
Not without another revolution going off….
even protecting Jon stewart or Bill Mahers for that matter, yuck! but allowed.

Never have words been so true:
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” A writer from the UK no less.

Ironic?

One more reason to be glad that we won. Go USA!

One more reason to be glad that we won. Go USA!

One more reason to be glad that we won. Go USA!

One more reason to be glad that we won. Go USA!

One more reason to be glad that we won. Go USA!

One more reason to be glad that we won. Go USA!

Does John Cleese applying for a fish license still make it on the air?

Won what?

Or worse, Red Eye would be gone!

You Mock Me.

What is wrong with you people that live in countries that do not have an explicit right to freedom of speech? Especially you Canada!  Why aren’t you rioting in the streets demanding that your government give you this right?

Canada has similar laws to Great Britain, ask Ann Coulter!  The question or point I’d like to make is: WHY would anyone want to give up a codified liberty or right?  

The Left, as of late, has been after the complete diminution of the second amendment.  Also, the Left, in the  false belief of their own wisdom, want to control speech as in what they call “hate” speech,” etc.  It seems to me the left likes free speech, but on their own terms.  Typical!Also, the Left has taken away cigarettes, made us wear seat belts and Helmets, created an unjust imbalance in the he said, she said laws, regarding domstic violence and rape.  Also, what your kid can and can’t bring to school to the point of absurdity, and on and on…The Right too, has its moments, by demanding prayer in school and various moral codification, among other things.  

“There are disturbances which accompany our civil liberties, which we as a Nation and culture, must be willing to accept, in order for our Country to remain free from an imposing and intrusive Government.”

Purveyor, 1993

For instance: the 1st amendment gives main stream political groups freedom of speech.  So too does that amendment give that freedom to the disreputable and unsavory.

Purveyor 

Long time no see…  Purveyor

What is Jon Stewart lying about, or what has he lied about that you know of. Im glad he is doing what he does because he calls out democrats, republicans and the media on their stupidity. He doesn’t follow talking points, and he does not think like a politician. So im just wondering what has he lied about?

revolutionary war

I wish more people didnt play into these political games. If your just watching Fox News or MSNBC then your not going to get honest debate. Its like no side democrat or republican will admit they are wrong in anything. All they do is point the finger at eachother say they did this they didnt do that and all their doing is following talking points. Its like no one will give the other side credit for what they have done and no one will take responsibility for the things they have done wrong or made mistakes in. Its all a big game to me and the people are the ones being sucked into it. These politicians could care less about us. Start taking away the benefits these politicians get and see how quickly they will fight for that stuff, but when it comes to the rest of us, cuts can be made so easily as long as you dont touch theirs.

But…reading the headline, I thought there had to be some satire involved.
Welcome to future of Democratic America, John.

In satire, vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement.  Although satire is usually meant to be funny, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit as a weapon.

The Daily Show aims at more than comedy. In its choice of topics, its use of
news footage to deconstruct the manipulations by public figures and its tendency
toward pointed satire over playing just for laughs, The Daily Show performs a
function that is close to journalistic in nature—getting people to think
critically about the public square.

In satire, vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement.  Although satire is usually meant to be funny, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit as a weapon.

The Daily Show aims at more than comedy. In its choice of topics, its use of
news footage to deconstruct the manipulations by public figures and its tendency
toward pointed satire over playing just for laughs, The Daily Show performs a
function that is close to journalistic in nature—getting people to think
critically about the public square.

Yep, because in the UK they never mock politicians, make political satires, or take cheap shots at them, etc.  Nope, never.

Are you sure that’s not the law here?  I have yet to Saturday Night Live mock Barack Obama, even once.  Same goes for Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.  I don’t know if Reid has even been impersonated on SNL.

First to get it out of the way, congrats to Mediaite for having the TDS clips for the UK audience. As is noted in the Storify, the Comedy Central website (and Hulu) are both restricted to those within the US, but either due to the production or the packaging, Mediaite clips are accessible around the world.

As for the specific issue of Britain, it revolves around rights.

The Royal Family owned the rights to the wedding and they licensed them with some conditions. These conditions only applied to the portions to which the family owned the rights, such as the wedding itself, but anyone could do anything with video they created themselves or to which they could obtain rights.

From what I gather regarding the use of Parliamentary proceedings, the issue is once again rights and it’s not a question of law, but rules, regulations and contract law. 

In the United States, Congress owns the cameras in the Capitol and because everything produced by the federal government is public domain, the same is true of Congressional proceedings. Right now, the company which broadcasts Congressional floor action gavel-to-gavel is C-SPAN, but all of the networks and for that matter anyone with the technology can tap into the Capitol feed.

C-SPAN goes gavel-to-gavel because that’s their mission and while they are a private company with no governmental reps on their board, their copyright notice grants free license to all floor action, probably because it’d be too hard to manage or police, but they retain ownership of everything produced with their cameras, elsewhere.

In Britain, the cameras and video are owned by a consortium of the major broadcasters. The participating companies have automatic rights to air the proceedings under Parliament’s rules and they license the streams to others who pay a fee. In the US, The Daily Show can use the footage for which CNN, the AP or someone had licensed under fair use and it would be up to whomever’s footage they’re using to challenge the claim, while the show’s outlet in Britain (Channel 4) are one of the owner’s of the parliamentary feed and they apparently interpret their license to forbid the rebroadcast even though TDS was using CNN’s feed.

The consortium or company which owns Parliament’s cameras and feeds are financed entirely by the broadcasters and they are the “owners”, but the board overseeing their operation has nine members from their ranks and nine from Parliament, with the Chair of the Ways and Means Committee acting as board chair and they have Parliament’s tenth or tie-breaking vote.

None of this is to say that The Daily Show or satire should be censored, I just offer the info as to how it came about. I also think that because TDS was using CNN’s feed, Channel 4 would probably belegally clear under Ameican law, but I don’t know the law in Britain and it’s understandable why their instinct could be to cover their flank.

Idiot

I live in the UK and could not watch the clip.  However, it is important to understand that we are able to mock our politicians and our royalty to our heart’s content and do so in such programmes as the satirical news quiz ‘Have I Got News for You’ which you might be able to pick up on You Tube or the BBC’s own web site.  What was at iusssue here was the right to mock the INSTITUTION of Parliament. which is the body which owns the copyright on these clips.

That being said we, like many countries, do have restrictions on free speech.  It is illegal in this country to incite hatred of any sort or to call people to commit acts of violence.  This protects the rights of religious, ethnic and sexual minorities and ensures that we do have a more peaceful society than, say, that of the USA where such groups as the Westbro Baptist Church are allowed to spit venom at mourners at funerals, groups which, over here, would be silenced and closed down. 

“ One of the nice things about having a Bill of Rights is that it specifically lays out freedoms given to the people and the press. The U.S. Constitution declares that freedom of speech and freedom of the press can never be infringed upon. Unfortunately, if you live in a nation where this is not clearly stated, you can legally censor media outlets without fear or repercussion. ”

This story reminds me of the time Obama summoned his co-conspirators in he MSM to the White House in the middle of the night, in a failed attempt to forever silence ” FOX NEWS. 

This incident alone proves beyond a shadow of a doubt Barack Hussein Obama ll is NOT an American……..fake Hawaiian birth certificate not withstanding.

Yes, most Americans interpret a right to free speech to be a right to have their own way.  A person has a right to speak, but they don’t have a right to be published on broadcast or cable television. 

People who use hate speech have a right to speak, but they don’t have a right to use hate speech and not be identified as purveyors of hate speech.  Jon Stewart actually ran afould of this some weeks ago when he was confronted with a sexist joke he made about a Republican female and a racist impersonation of a black Republican who is running for president.

Mocketh Ye not Merrie Auld England, a satire of itself bestrewn with pretentious lunacy masquerading as noble gentility which never was. Britannia rules no more.

LOL

Do you think that the BBC is impartial?

LOL

I’ve found it quite ironic, not to mention troubling, that Britain, the setting of George Orwell’s fictional dystopian novel “1984″, has apparently become the most camera-surveillance-heavy society in the world. And now this.

…and if Jon Stewart was satirically challenging Obama, Obama would be trying to get him banned here too and everybody knows it.

You exaggerate.  This is a narrow infringement on free speech, kind of like banning only handguns or ‘assault weapons’ is only a narrow infringement on American 2nd amendment rights.

Kudos to you Josh Feldman.  This is a tremendous piece of journalism.

There was no “racist impersonation”. There was FOX getting their panties in a bunch for no reason (again)…is that what you are referring to?

*sigh* another brain-dead birther Moron.

no, actually, he wouldn’t. Jon has mocked Obama many times on his show…but I guess you’d actually have to WATCH it to know that…but it’s just more fun for you morons to talk shit isn’t it?

Another sore point with the UK is their poor performance during WWII. Mentioning that on a UK media site usually results in the comment being deleted by the moderator. The UK is obsessed with WWII. It can only be an inferiority complex. When you mention they were defeated by the Germans right along with the French, they explode with rage. When you mention that even when they tagged along with the Americans after a massive military build-up, and after 3/4 of the German army was tied up on the eastern front, they still had their ass kicked by the Germans any time the odds were even remotely even, they go berserk. 

Axl, is that your Dick Van Dyke impression – it certainly isn’t an impression of anyone from England in the last 200 years!

I live in England and by the use of technology and a little ingenuity I did see the show. I won’t say how as there are plenty of guides out there and Google is a wonderful search engine.

Our Prime Minister (Cameron) is a buffoon, the clip and comments by Jon Stewart actually made Cameron look good, but I still think it should have been broadcast here. The current law which bans the use of Parliamentary proceedings in satirical programs is almost as stupid as when we had laws banning the voice of any spokesperson for the IRA being broadcast (programme makers just employed Irish actors to dub the original video so as to get around that one) I cant see why we shouldn’t be allowed to mock them in their place of work, they mock us all the time with the way they spend our money.

As for freedom of speech; I believe we have a good balance in the UK between freedom of expression and preventing people from inciting hatred. As a previous poster mentioned – the US has widespread freedom of speech laws, but the UK doesn’t have the idiots from Westboro church attending funerals of fallen heroes. Given the choice between complete freedom of speech or a system like ours where you cannot make hate speech, I think I would rather have the latter. The vast majority of us don’t feel the need to violently attack other peoples skin colour/sexual preference/religion/etc, so why should we make laws that allow a very small minority to do so.

@f11b269d81992bcb9d7ad8ca8174bebc:disqus – they go ‘berserk’ because you are talking nonsense. Remember
that WWII was a 6 year war, not just the 4 years that your boys joined in for
- most historical reports suggest that if the US hadn’t joined in then the war would have lasted longer but the outcome would have been the same. Additionally Churchill asked the US to join in several times but it was only Pearl Harbour that made America sit up and listen.

I say this as a descendant of one of the Americans who were stationed in our country – I am 1/4 American, unfortunately he didn’t leave his name and number so I never got to know my American Grandfather.

I don’t think this discussion was about WW2 though, it was about freedom of speech in the US vs. in the UK – many people may find it odd that *you* brought up WWII and yet you say the Brits are the ones obsessed by it.

Wow. The ignorance, or else the misunderstanding, regarding this is staggering.  Of course you can “mock” politicians in the UK.  Duh!  What you can’t do is use footage of parliamentary proceedings for comedic purposes.  And of course the UK has freedom of speech. But it’s not an absolute freedom, just like it’s not in the US either. Sometimes competing “rights” clash with each other.  So, for instance, the rule of “sub judice” comes into play regarding criminal proceedings, which bans all parties involved in criminal matters from disclosing the the details of crimes, investigations, etc. once a suspect has been charged.  The prevents the ridiculous “trial in the press” that is so common in the US, and which frequently interferes with justice.  
I bet the vast majority of the people on this board have never been to the UK, and know nothing about its laws.  Yet feel perfectly capable of commenting on them as if they are experts.  No wonder the world thinks Americans are arrogant.

nice satire.

Ummm.  Wasn’t it Bush and/or Cheney who said “if you don’t agree with us you must be against us”??  Sounds like freedom of speech to me.

Ukgentleman(above) raises a very good point and a topical one. 2 Tabloid newspapers in the UK were recently prosecuted for contempt of court after they made vicious comments about a man who had been arrested by police for questioning regarding a murdered woman. The man was released by police without charge and the killer was discovered shortly afterwards. However the Crown Prosecution brought charges against the Newspapers as they would have damaged the innocent man’s chance of a fair trial if he had been the prime suspect. The innocent man has just recently brought successful libel cases against those newspapers which told lies about him – full story here – http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/jul/29/joanna-yeates-murder-court-contempt

Wow, I really hope you are good at irony, or it is scary how quickly you are okay with a loss of freedoms. Perhaps we should all sign up for a free speach license to say what we want, as we do gun registration, it’s just a narrow infringement afterall.

Don’t worry, Xraex413, the silly wonk is probably a “Reich-public-CON”.  You know they can’t stand the truth!

“Although satire is usually meant to be funny, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit as a weapon.”

That is precisely why The Brits, et. al. are so against it.

You need to wipe your mouth because your opinions and your breath smell lile shit…you moron…lol…idiot…lol

As I began to read this article – actually by the end of the title – my first thought was, “huh?? when did this happen?”  ie – what about Monty Python, et al?  Not to mention countless other satirical troops etc. from England…  When I was a kid, it was commonly believed political satire must have originated there, being as there was so much of it!  I’m exaggerating, of course, but frankly I remain sceptical as to the veracity of what I read above, and will remain so unless I see the actual wording of the relevant law(s).

Regarding the issue of laws that may limit freedoms and liberties in Canada, including freedom of speech, rights of assembly, etc, I must say – with all due respect, Bullshit!!  (and frankly, Ann Coulter can kiss my ass!)

As a Canadian having lived in Canada for all of my 46 years, I know I need have absolutely no hesitation whatsoever speaking my mind, whatever the issue or subject matter. I am totally free to do so with ZERO risk of repercussions or hassles from any governing body or agency.  I am governed on the matter by tact and perhaps politeness, nothing more.  The laws referred to simply keep insanity under control, if you will – not unlike those prohibiting one from shouting “fire” in a crowded theatre.

England is looking to become the actual world featured in the movie V for Vendetta.

Couldn’t happen to a better country. That country is gone.

I too am a fan of Oliver Wendall Holmes. He and Justice Brandeis were known as the great dissenters. Anyway, I am surprised at your anger and vehemence. More to the point I am stunned at your ignorance of your own Country? Canada has “notorious” hate speech laws that are enforced regularly that would make an American apoplectic. Furthermore, Ann Coulter was scheduled to appear at the University of Ottawa, (didn’t you read my post?) and the Campus Provost Marshal wrote to her before hand threatening her with summary arrest if she crossed the very THIN Canadian hate speech line.
Also, and curiously, the University of Ottawa held an “anti Israeli apartheid week that was chocked full of HATE SPEECH. So, maybe you’re right after all? LOL
I should note that I seldom resort to hyperbolae, profanity or vulgarity. However, your Post easily refuted as it was, is one of the most intellectually pathetic, I have read. LOL

Really?  I’ve seen both Obama and Pelosi mocked on SNL.  

Who are Bush and Cheney?

I’ve watched just about every Daily Show and Jon Stewart has definitely made fun of Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and Biden.  That’s what I like about him.  He makes fun of everyone.  

puryeror, I am no Ann Coulter fan, but the University of Ottawa was wrong.
Canada’s  ‘Canadian Human Rights Act’ goes to far in my opinion. As long as someone is not advocating violence, free speech is a good thing.

Often satire unveils aspects to a political discourse that are unaccessible during a standard debate. But I guess that fact of history flew right over your head as you throw a bunch of random people into the same pot. Satire is as old as Greek culture and is an important part of politics and culture.

Universities are suppose to be about diversity of opinions. When I was in college, I would attend lectures and speaking engagements by people from all over the political spectrum. When I disagreed with a speaker, I would question and disagree with them in an adult way.

I love Canada, have traveled in Canada in the past, and have family on the border, but Canada is sometimes too Politically Correct.

Universities are suppose to be about diversity of opinions. When I was in college, I would attend lectures and speaking engagements by people from all over the political spectrum. When I disagreed with a speaker, I would question and disagree with them in an adult way.

I love Canada, have traveled in Canada in the past, and have family on the border, but Canada is sometimes too Politically Correct.

Thanks Freak.

This particular set of Posts was more about defending a fellow American (Coulter) than anything else. Canadians, sometimes act superior, but, they don’t have a 1st amendment! LOL I really cleaned this guys clock and he had it coming. The Charter for the Canadian Human Rights Commission is big enough to drive a truck through and they can arrest just about anybody on the pretext of human rights!
Thanks again

You know how Conservative and Libertarian I am? So, when I was in college, in classroom formats, I saw Jessie Jackson, Stokely Carmichael, of the Student Non Violent Coordinating Commitee (SNCC) from the 60s. Also Russell Means of the American Indian Movement and Haani Traask, a Hawaii rights agitator etc. It seems you and I recognize that wisdom can be found in unlikely places?
Oh yes, my Gran Parents owned a hunting Lodge in Ontario and I have a DeHavilland Beaver T-Shirt (float plane)

I saw Jesse Jackson speak in the mid 1990′s (front row). He has a way with words ( LOL, I always remember when he read Green eggs and Ham on SNL)

I  listened to Timothy Leary a couple of years before he died (I still have the flyer posted on the campus wall: How To Operate Your Brain). I argued once with David Horowitz (pre 9/11 days). I have listened and asked questions to many others.

I refuse to fear free speech. Yes, wisdom can be found where you least expect it!

I do fear restrictions on free speech. For instance, I support Gay rights, but if someone wants too make a fool of themselves by using the “F” word, let them. They show themselves for what they are. Terry Jones lives in my neck of the woods, and as long as its his own copy of the Quran, and he does not start a forest fire, let him burn it (I do find it gauche). I myself would never burn my personal copy of the Quran.

Canada is using it to intimidate others. Not cool!

Let Ann Coulter speak her mind. One does not have to agree or even listen to her.

“I bet the vast majority of the people on this board have never been to the UK,”

I go to UK news sites and forum all the time. The vast majority of people in the UK commenting on their boards, I suspect, have never been to the United States.

Considering the geographical distance and the huge body of water lying between us, it is to be expected. This American has traveled Canada and part of Mexico, but never to the UK (and I am a quarter Welch)

I find both sides arrogant on occasion. Again, it is to be expected. We still have much in common.

Sure, 20 Republican hit pieces for every Obama, Pelosi, Reid or Biden one.  I’m still waiting for Stewart to address Pelosi’s senile comment:

Today ‘We’re Trying To Save Life On This Planet As We Know It’ 

Jon Stewart knows better than to go after Obama like he went after President Bush because Obama would black ball him in a Chicago minute exactly the same way he tried to black ball Bill O’Reilly.

O’Reilly fought back like a tiger and Obama folded up his tent and went home with his tail between his legs, but Stewart wouldn’t survive an Obama onslaught.

Jon Stewart knows better than to go after Obama like he went after President Bush because Obama would black ball him in a Chicago minute exactly the same way he tried to black ball Bill O’Reilly.

O’Reilly fought back like a tiger and Obama folded up his tent and went home with his tail between his legs, but Stewart wouldn’t survive an Obama onslaught.

Wow. Talk about censorship. Here I thought they didn’t hold their politicians up to the god level that they hold their queen. Or the level they pretend royalty is held up to.

Wow. Talk about censorship. Here I thought they didn’t hold their politicians up to the god level that they hold their queen. Or the level they pretend royalty is held up to.

A person (Politician?) having problems beeing mocked and feeling put down, lacks complete self-criticism and is unfit for that job. It shows lack of personality, hence lack of respectability.
Respect and recognition cannot be gained by command of order, but only by openness and appropriate behaviour, e.g. respect for others.

Greets from Germany

You’re mistaken. Canada adopted a rights charter with constitutional force in the 1980s. It protects freedom of expression under s 2. Read more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms.

Australia also has a doctrine implied from the constitution protecting political speech, which this would probably come under.

Nice trolling but I don’t believe they were defeated?

Considering this dilemma Maher finds himself a part of, perhaps his Socialist supporters might reconsider their support of the “Fairness Doctrine” or hate speech laws?  Or, banning any speech they don’t like which, effectively, is what the Socialist-Democrats desire.

So, now that the Socialist “Ox is being gored,” so to speak, a lesson lies within for the Socialists?  

Nope, right over the top of their pointy heads!  LOL

Purveyor

could you list a few of those lies and links to the shows they appeared on?

All hail glorious Socialism.

The Bill of Wrongs,was signed into Canadian History by the biggest Liberal Moron ever Pierre Idiot Tru Doh!

Yes, that is right I piss on your Liberal Icon.  The Man who single highhandedly sent the Canadian Dollar Down the tubes, Unionized and forced most Canadian Small Business out of business and the larger business getting out of Canada.  Made the division between right and left even more wider, and sold most of Canada out to the States. (not that all of that was bad) but for you pseudo nationalists it should make your blood boil.

The only thing that the Bill of Rights has done for Canada is make the Left Bitch even more about their rights, and used it to bring in stupid things like “The Fairness Doctrine” and “Hate Crimes Legislation”.  At face value these sound like progressive things, but they aren’t they are Policing Tactics against other minorities, businesses, religion convictions, and free-enterprise.  They are used by the Left specifically to quash any semblance of distinction, privacy, freedom of press, speech, religion and State (Provincial) Rights.

Don’t adapt any of those doctrines America or you are headed for serious trouble. (Alas you already have in some ways)  But stop it before you lose your freedom speech.

You are on the Left End of the stick then I would imagine, cause while you toddle through your life others are being arrested for what they believe in…

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/723946/posts

Let’s get one thing straight, I believe everyone has a right, but that doesn’t make it right and people have a right to disagree with your mindset, no matter what it is.

Unless you are taking Pot Shots at the Tories. ..
The U.K, is always open season on usually Conservative Political Pundits, with shows like Mock the Week, and one of my old time faves, Spitting Image, NTNN, and Python…. What happened to that Good Old Dry British Satire where no one was safe?

Reality is they mock the Right way more than the Left, but why would you expect anything different… it’s Hollywood (Even though it is shot in NY) Tina Fey was absolutely cruel off set when Palin came on the show.

I think Mad TV did a better job of keeping it balanced…maybe that’s why it got shut down?  ;)

Well done, and well written Magister, thanks for the information!

What some define as Hate can be just a difference of opinion or personal conviction.
We can stop people from physically harming others or trying to eradicate themselves or their opinion out of the World, but if you want to stop someone from telling you they disagree with you and don’t think what you are doing is right, Then you need to examine your own motives, or agendas and stop calling them Haters.

Große Worte! User280!

Some people obviously don’t watch Have I Got News For You…

How ironic that the episode Jon spent praising the UK parliamentary system is banned over there. Sad!

There is no such thing as a “narrow” infringement on free speech. It’s all or nothing.

If political satire was such a horrible evil thing, then why do British Universities still teach Voltaire? Hypocritical scum.

 .. And I’m grateful I don’t live in the US. 
 Funny’ol world isn’t it?

 They didn’t use parliamentary footage.

 The idea is that you can mock anything and anyone, you just can’t use the actual footage of them doing their job WHILST you do it. 

 It’s to prevent undermining the Government’s authority. You can mock the government, you can’t use the Parliamentary channel to do it. 

How are Freedom of the Press and Freedom of Speech socialism? Just because you learned a new word doesn’t mean it fits in every sentence.

Maybe you should take your own advice and quit the ad hominem attacks on “liberals” and “the left”. It doesn’t make you intelligent, or the things you say valid in any way that would be worthy of debate.

That’s not totally correct. It’s the use of footage from parliament in satire not satire about parliament. Anyhow it’s still not good.

That’s not totally correct. It’s the use of footage from parliament in satire not satire about parliament. Anyhow it’s still not good.

“You cannot hope to bribe or twist (thank God!) the British
journalist.  But, seeing what the man
will do unbribed, there’s no occasion to.” — Humbert Wolfe

You misinterpreted my sarcasm.  Any infringement on a basic right, whether it is to arms or speech, is unacceptable.  Allowing such an infringement in one area establishes the precedent that these rights are not absolute.

The BBC news is NOT impartial. It’s just as biased as Fox News, but dangerously more subtle. After theLondon riots there was not one BBC item criticising or even mentioning any government policy that could have contributed to the causes of rioting. NOT ONE! Live Parlimentary coverage should be open to “p*ss taking” just as any political coverage in the public domain.

…I am a ‘uk resident’ & when I tried to watch the clip from the ‘daily show’ on this page, guess what happened, pretty much what I expected to happen….I got the message ‘sorry, this video is unavailable from your location’…as I do when I try to ‘watch’ daily show clips…on any website…I did wonder why the ‘episode’ in question was pulled though…I had recorded the ‘Daily Show – Global Edition’ as advertised & listed in the ‘EPG’ I use, SKY HD+ [ha ha no surprise there then!] & it appeared to have ‘duly recorded at the scheduled time’…however…I found myself watching, well only briefly…a short documentary about the song by the Jackson 5 ‘don’t blame it on the sunshine, blame it on the boogie’ & the composer’s life?? No message preceding the ‘change to programme’ prior to the programme…but no announcement either ways…it was still called ‘the daily show – global edition’ in the ‘recorded’ programmes’ listing…? This article explains things…nobody, even channel4…who are usually ‘unafraid’ to say…at least why?’ never mentioned it, let alone.explain it! Also,here in the uk…if the govt. don’t like a youtube video – uploaded by a member of the public…ie..mobile phone camera footage [so it's not a copyright issue], perhaps showing the police in a ‘situation’…which documents violence against a member of the public…? YouTube…removes it…without any reason being asked for? & certainly not given!

Another moment in our ‘big brother state’ was the arrest of Charlie Veitch…the day before the ‘royal wedding’..he’s an activist & has a website called ‘the love police’…he was taken away in handcuffs & locked up till the event was over…? the reason given to him was, I am paraphrasing here..’that he was INTENDING..! joining the crowds for the event & using a ‘loudhailer’, making ‘satirical &/or ironic comments’! A ‘thoughtcrime’?

 And most recently, though this has been kept out of the Puppet Press…Murdoch or no…! As we are now living in ‘Austerity Britain’ to use ‘their’ continuously repeated phrase! One of the ‘services’ being ‘cut’ [to ribbons....?] are the ‘public libraries’…many being shut down completely? The Books…? Surely they are being given to ‘schools/other’ who could ‘sorely’ use them…? NOPE! they are being ‘burnt’…not even recycled..? Nope..they are being removed in ‘unidentified vans’ during the hours of ‘darkness’! 

 We here in the UK are the most surveilled nation on earth! Yet whenever ‘ccctv footage’ could help any enqyuiries ie…the 7/7 Bombings of 2005….Apparently? they were all ‘out of working order’? Then, & only after a so called ‘public enquiry’ did the police/authorities….release anything..but these were ‘poor quality stills’ from ‘unidentifiable/incorrectly dated cctv footage…’! So why bother with them at all…same thing happened at the ‘coroners enquiry’ into the shooting of Jean Charles Menendez, the Brazilian shot 7 times in the head by our police…days after the previous incident…on a ‘tube train’, in London, after they had 1stly cleared all other passengers & members of the public in the Station…! The ‘coroner’ then ‘unlawfully’ instructed the jury at that enquiry…they could’nt bring back a verdict of ‘murder, manslaughter, or unlawful killing’…they were left with, officially…only ‘misadventure’..like  he had died as a result of an accident – brought about by his own folly’!

 Sooo! there you have it…I would so like to have seen Jon Stewart’s satirical, parliament footage! He may want to watch himself…if travelling to the UK, our govt./royals may get him arrested ‘for planning to, think about parliament in a satirical/ironic manner’ at a later date! Hell, I bet they could get your govt. to extradite him for the ‘pre-thought crime’! So, as bad as the media is in the US of A…For FUX sake…be grateful for what you’ve got…..STILL!

xxx love sticky