Sean Gabb at Exeter

Richard Allen · 12-03-2008, 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by david H

There is no equation between speaking to a BNP meeting and encouraging(not tolerating) child pornography. This shows the essential corruption and degredation of those who run UKIP. If a member believes there has been treason committed by senior politicians you throw him out but if one better known encourages child pornography you ask him to become a canddate!
Why not disabuse the member who believes there has been treason. Or has there but you seek to cover it up? Further, you must now state clearly: does UKIP support child pornography or not? You are trying to obfuscate the issue.
Harry you are corrupt to allow him those opinions and that is not the nature of freedom at all. That is the nature of decadence: people allowing others to commit evil on those who need our protection. It is our duty to protect the innocent and defenceless. This attitude allows a climate of permissability where these acts become permissable. The thought is actually a desire not a cold idea and leads to the act(s).

I am not pleased that a non member was offered a place as a candidate but I am pretty certain that who ever made such an offer (while being stupid and treating UKIP members badly) was not aware of Mr Gabb's utterly repugnant views on child pornography. If, in the unlikely event, that the person making the offer was aware of it he/she should be expelled from UKIP.

mkpdavies · 12-03-2008, 10:13 PM

I think the reaction from UKIP says it all. They didn't have a scooby that Gabb had that view. I didn't until now and I have read a lot of his stuff.

He has destroyed my opinion of him.

Geoffrey Collier · 12-03-2008, 11:10 PM

harryaldridge: Of course it would be in order to seek guidance on carpentry from someone who was competent in that craft. If you discover that he holds views on other subjects which are reprehensible, that is no impediment to competent tuition about carpentry. However, should you sponsor him to become a councillor or MP, it is vital that you first take account of his repugnent views, for in his public position, deliberation on many issues will be
necessary. Should you not know his views on subjects, other than carpentry,
what would be your justification for sponsoring anyone about whom you know so little. Why not conclude that you are not prepared to defend the indefensible and, offering Dr Gabb a candidature as a UKIP MEP, was wrong?

B.A.Ware · 13-03-2008, 01:00 AM

Quote:

I do not believe, however, that mere possession of such pictures should be an offence
I turn to child pornography. If someone produces or commissions indecent pictures of a child, he is guilty of sexual assault or is an accessory to sexual assault. If someone merely buys such pictures, without having directly commissioned them, it is arguable that he too should be treated as an accessory - in the same way as it is illegal knowingly to buy stolen goods. If someone is under investigation for a sexual assault on children, and a search of his property turns up indecent pictures of children, these should of course be used as evidence.
The most practical argument for this rule is that indecent photographs might be part of a chain of evidence against a child molester, and the case will usually stand or fall on all the evidence

Quote:

If we assume that the purpose of the laws against child pornography are to protect children, rather than police the imagination, it follows that indecent pictures made in Thailand are a matter for the Thai authorities.

I have just visited Sean Gabbs site to read his justification for the garbage that was posted, he has now tried to justify his warped view by saying possion of child pornography could be used as evidence against the person who possesess it. And child pornography produced abroad should be dealt with the relevent authorities there.
How all this sits with the following qoute I don’t know.

Quote:

I do not believe possession of child pornography should be a crime. I do not even believe it should be a crime to publish child pornography here that was made abroad by and with foreigners.

If this man really believes that anyone should be allowed to possess this kind of material he must be totally morally bankrupt.

.

mkpdavies · 13-03-2008, 08:57 AM

I see it in the same light as stolen goods. Just because you didn't nick the item in the first place, doesn't mean you can KNOWINGLY accept them later down the line.

It isn't about thought crime, it is about real crime where someone has been physically violated to produce the material.Every part of that is criminal to me and Gabb seems to have lost the plot.

harryaldridge · 13-03-2008, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geoffrey Collier

harryaldridge: Of course it would be in order to seek guidance on carpentry from someone who was competent in that craft. If you discover that he holds views on other subjects which are reprehensible, that is no impediment to competent tuition about carpentry. However, should you sponsor him to become a councillor or MP, it is vital that you first take account of his repugnent views, for in his public position, deliberation on many issues will be
necessary. Should you not know his views on subjects, other than carpentry,
what would be your justification for sponsoring anyone about whom you know so little. Why not conclude that you are not prepared to defend the indefensible and, offering Dr Gabb a candidature as a UKIP MEP, was wrong?

I agree it was wrong to offer Dr Gabb a candidature, but only in hindsight. It was quite a legitimate mistake on the part of the individual concerned to offer it without knowing his views. It does not affect his right to hold such views and nor should it affect his ability to speak on the subject of liberty as his did in Exeter, at other rallys. Thankfully most sane people would disagree with his particular views on child porn, which is fine, but his views should not preclude his future speaking or attending UKIP events. I think it is quite possible to make clear that UKIP does not agree or condone his particular views, but that we respect his philosophical outlook on liberty in general and on other issues.

Hartlepool · 13-03-2008, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by B.A.Ware

Its nice to see UKIP acting so swiftly to correct this situation, well done

I called the UKIP Press office and told them about it the same day as it was posted on here.

I spoke to someone who identified themselves twice as being called Clive.

Geoffrey Collier · 13-03-2008, 11:15 AM

harryaldridge: It was not merely wrong in hindsight. To offer someone who is not a Party member, who is not on the National List and has not been interviewed, the prospect of being a UKIP candidate in the Euro-election 2009was wholly indefensible. The issue was compounded further, by even raising the subject of 'List Placing'. Are we being told that County Committees, are now employing methids associated with Tammany Hall? How can you claim,
"It was quite a legitimate mistake, on the part of the individiual concerned, to offer it without knowing his views'. What gives that mistake any basis for legitimacy? Are you not elevating this to the level of the, 'Theatre of the Absurd'.

Wouldn't it be reasonable for the person concerned, whoever he or she may be, to take full responsibility and resign? That the normal procedure
in any honourable organisation. Our leader must be incandescent with anger.

describe this matter irrespective That was irrefutably wrong at the time. It bodes ill for our Party that the issue of, 'list placing'

Geoffrey Collier · 13-03-2008, 11:18 AM

Sorry about the last line, that really was a genuine mistake.

g hall · 13-03-2008, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by British-Conservatism

I have no doubt in the future if the Liberals, Socialists and Libertarians get they way they Pedophilia will be legalised.
It may sound shocking now but no one could have imagined 50 years ago that homosexuality would be legalised or that men would be allowed to kiss and cavort in public.
Only a Traditional Conservative government can stop this descent into the abyss.

On the subject of traditional Conservatives would this include those who use oranges and asphyxiation to heighten their erotic experience or just spanking ?

Further on consent
Age of Consent

Lets all go back to Victorian values ? acts passed 40 and 50 years after her ascent and 1885 the year homosexuality was made illegal and lesbianism never was so not unlawful for long

As regards images many fetishists are excited by images which to the great majority are lacking in any appeal, how can that be policed?

DK is right about the way technology has opened up mass communication Pandora's box is opened and cannot be closed

It's telling that policing the net is more concerned with maintaining the profits of media companies then finding out the source and traffic in unacceptable pornography (or erotica for the more discerning

)

I believe I have made my position clear but will reiterate for the less then able
I believe in the age of consent no lower then 15 but believe 16 is better I believe that there should be anti predator sanctions and am happy for homosexuals and lesbians to have equal rights but I stress that I find positive discrimination and quotas in promoting people to be wrong and that it should be made illegal

What an individual does within their own home providing they did not hurt anyone else used to be part of being British didn't it ?

12-03-2008, 10:13 PM	#42 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 31,189 Party: Libertarian Party	I think the reaction from UKIP says it all. They didn't have a scooby that Gabb had that view. I didn't until now and I have read a lot of his stuff. He has destroyed my opinion of him. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

13-03-2008, 08:57 AM	#45 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 31,189 Party: Libertarian Party	I see it in the same light as stolen goods. Just because you didn't nick the item in the first place, doesn't mean you can KNOWINGLY accept them later down the line. It isn't about thought crime, it is about real crime where someone has been physically violated to produce the material.Every part of that is criminal to me and Gabb seems to have lost the plot. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

12-03-2008, 11:10 PM	#43 (permalink)
Geoffrey Collier Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 1,189	harryaldridge: Of course it would be in order to seek guidance on carpentry from someone who was competent in that craft. If you discover that he holds views on other subjects which are reprehensible, that is no impediment to competent tuition about carpentry. However, should you sponsor him to become a councillor or MP, it is vital that you first take account of his repugnent views, for in his public position, deliberation on many issues will be necessary. Should you not know his views on subjects, other than carpentry, what would be your justification for sponsoring anyone about whom you know so little. Why not conclude that you are not prepared to defend the indefensible and, offering Dr Gabb a candidature as a UKIP MEP, was wrong?

13-03-2008, 11:15 AM	#48 (permalink)
Geoffrey Collier Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 1,189	harryaldridge: It was not merely wrong in hindsight. To offer someone who is not a Party member, who is not on the National List and has not been interviewed, the prospect of being a UKIP candidate in the Euro-election 2009was wholly indefensible. The issue was compounded further, by even raising the subject of 'List Placing'. Are we being told that County Committees, are now employing methids associated with Tammany Hall? How can you claim, "It was quite a legitimate mistake, on the part of the individiual concerned, to offer it without knowing his views'. What gives that mistake any basis for legitimacy? Are you not elevating this to the level of the, 'Theatre of the Absurd'. Wouldn't it be reasonable for the person concerned, whoever he or she may be, to take full responsibility and resign? That the normal procedure in any honourable organisation. Our leader must be incandescent with anger. describe this matter irrespective That was irrefutably wrong at the time. It bodes ill for our Party that the issue of, 'list placing'

13-03-2008, 11:18 AM	#49 (permalink)
Geoffrey Collier Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 1,189	Sorry about the last line, that really was a genuine mistake.