Scotish man convicted for "offensive speech"

[StLucieBengal]

(04-03-2018, 09:08 PM)hollodero Wrote: I said he threatened it. Which he did.

Also, that Obama tapped some folk - I heard Merkel, and that's all I need to know - is something I never really liked about him. So how does that work. Because of Obama, does Trump get a freebie on calling the media enemy of the people now? Do these unrelated things equal out somehow?

And lastly, to me FOX is a republican propaganda outlet. I guess it's because of donors and money and tax cuts and such. But that's your state media, congratulations, it really looks like Kazachstan TV.
I mean, talk about obvious bias. Trump listens to FOX, changes policies because of FOX, retweets FOX, recruits personnel from FOX, dines with Hannity. It doesn't get much closer than that.



Well, then there's really not much point in talking to me, right. Keep that in mind.

Obama wired tapped James Rosen , his parents, and the ASsociated press.

Trump calling them out is not even close to the same,

Fox is a private corporation. We don’t do state media like Europe does. But inwill give you its corporate media. It’s another issue.

As far as talking with you..... you will miss out on being mistaken for Arturo lol.

[THE Bigzoman]

(04-03-2018, 05:41 PM)hollodero Wrote: Oh he very much is not. This is your president. And in times where Trump is president, Americans don't get to lecture western Europe about freedom of speech. We can clearly see the Trump version of that concept, the one your electorate went to. It's having a state propaganda channel to flatter the leadership, and threaten unwilling media to sue them, to open up the libel laws for being able to. Not for obvious lies - for being "dishonest". Trump calls the uncooperating media the enemy of the people. So these are things going on in US leadership these times. It just looks funny when you point to some other democracies and their "authoritarian shitheads" with that huge elephant in your own yard.



Don't call us stupid kids. Please. We don't get bullied all the time. It's also quite easily avoidable, don't train your dog Sieg Heil poses and share it on youtube. And I agree, people should feel free to be such douchebags, probably, there's a point that can be made about this. But don't exaggerate this example to a large freedom of speech crisis in Europe.

"Your president tweets mean things to multinational news corporations, so don't you dare berate us for jailing an edgy YouTuber!"

Really?

I also love your not so subtle attempt to rationalize this whole thing with your "it's simple, don't train your dog to do sieg hail." It just proves my point.

Read the actual conviction dude. You'll find that it's really not that simple and this sets a very dangerous common law precedent; one where convictions like this in Scotland will be completely arbitrary.

There's literally no comparison here. And I didn't call You a dumb kid. I said you're acting like one who got bullied all the time.

[THE Bigzoman]

(04-03-2018, 06:20 PM)Dill Wrote: Some of them had some bad experiences when they DIDN'T repress hate speech. 

Really bad in fact.

So the memory lingers.

Attributing nazism to people allowing hateful rhetoric to go unchallenged is a gross simplification of what actually happend. It's almost lying.

Opposition to Nazis wasn't uncommon in Germany. People wrote, did speeches against, and even fought them in the streets.

The only time you could argue that there was silence was when Hitler sly dogged his way into a dictatorship and forced people to be silent under the threat of reparisal. And to be honest, I can't fault people for zipping their lips for their own self preseversation.

[THE Bigzoman]

(04-03-2018, 06:27 PM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: Of course, she got condamned !! Actually people were shocked she wasn't condemened to more than she got.

It's different philosophy, different cultures.

Who would be happy that the dude working in Wallmart for beef get killed by a crazy man with a knife ? Really ?

Another one get condamned because he was happy a cop was killed. 

That's our laws, you have yours.

Being that much stupid is reprehensible by law.

What would you have done if some people danced during 911 ?? Accept their free speech ? Or punch them down ?

I'd think they're dicks but respect their right to express themselves as long as they're not bringing tangible harm to others?

[THE Bigzoman]

(04-03-2018, 05:30 PM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: We had the nazis in Europe for 12 years, millions of dead people, concentration camps. What do you expect ?

A red carpet ?

I'd expect you to have the decency to not convict and probably jail someone for what's clearly a joke.

Hell, the freaking nazis charged a Finnish man for literally the same thing. But Scotland is actually making them look decent in comparison because they didn't actually go through with it.

I'm on a phone so I can't link the article, but google "nazi Finnish man dog salute". You're bound to find it.

[StLucieBengal]

(04-03-2018, 06:27 PM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: What would you have done if some people danced during 911 ?? Accept their free speech ? Or punch them down ?

The Muslims were dancing and cheering all over the place.

We all looked them and figured they were just worthless degenerates. No one arrested them.

[GMDino]

(04-03-2018, 11:30 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: The Muslims were dancing and cheering all over the place.  

We all looked them and figured they were just worthless degenerates.  No one arrested them.

[hollodero]

(04-03-2018, 11:10 PM)THE Bigzoman Wrote: Hell, the freaking nazis charged a Finnish man for literally the same thing. But Scotland is actually making them look decent in comparison  because they didn't actually go through with it.

You're really saying Scotland is making the Nazis look decent in comparison.

Well, thanks for commenting.

[StLucieBengal]

(04-03-2018, 11:35 PM)GMDino Wrote:

Quote:But in a new examination by NJ Advance Media, a police officer who worked on 9/11 and residents on the outskirts of Journal Square say they witnessed small pockets of people celebrating before the groups dispersed or were broken up by authorities.

"When I saw they were happy, I was pissed," said Ron Knight, 56, a Tonnele Avenue resident who said he heard cries of "Allahu Akbar"

A retired police captain, Peter Gallagher, said he cleared a rooftop celebration of 20 to 30 people at 6 Tonnele Ave., a four-story apartment building with an unobstructed view of Lower Manhattan, in the hours after the second tower fell.

Muslim celebrations in Jersey City on 9/11
A Google Earth view of 6 Tonnele Ave., the triangular building at center. Jersey City police cleared a group of celebrating Muslims from the roof on 9/11, a retired captain says.

"Some men were dancing, some held kids on their shoulders," said Gallagher, then a sergeant. "The women were shouting in Arabic and keening in the high-pitched wail of Arabic fashion. They were told to go back to their apartments since a crowd of non-Muslims was gathering on the sidewalk below and we feared for their safety."

[THE Bigzoman]

(04-03-2018, 11:40 PM)hollodero Wrote: You're really saying Scotland is making the Nazis look decent in comparison.

Well, thanks for commenting.

No problem. Have fun pretending that mean tweets to news corporations is comparable to jailing john the plumber for a shitty joke.

[Arturo Bandini]

(04-03-2018, 11:10 PM)THE Bigzoman Wrote: I'd expect you to have the decency to not convict and probably jail someone for what's clearly a joke.

Hell, the freaking nazis charged a Finnish man for literally the same thing. But Scotland is actually making them look decent in comparison  because they didn't actually go through with it.

I'm on a phone so I can't link the article, but google "nazi Finnish man dog salute". You're bound to find it.

They didn't go in jail. Why are you making things up ?

[THE Bigzoman]

(04-04-2018, 02:58 AM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: They didn't go in jail. Why are you making things up ?

"Probably"

His conviction carries jail time. Sentencing in a few weeks

[Arturo Bandini]

I don't know about Scotland, they do whatever they want, it's their country.

[GMDino]

(04-04-2018, 09:18 AM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: I don't know about Scotland, they do whatever they want, it's their country.

We tend to have these discussion all the time here:  How our laws would be better in other countries.  Usually the next discussion is how what works in other countries would/could never work here in America.  Like national health care, free education, gun laws, etc.

That's why I said we would have to invade and bring freedom to Scotland!  

[Dill]

(04-03-2018, 10:13 PM)THE Bigzoman Wrote: Attributing nazism to people allowing hateful rhetoric to go unchallenged is a gross simplification of what actually happend. It's almost lying.

Opposition to Nazis wasn't uncommon in Germany. People wrote, did speeches against, and even fought them in the streets.

The only time you could argue that there was silence was when Hitler sly dogged  his way into a dictatorship and forced people to be silent under the threat of reparisal. And to be honest, I can't fault people  for zipping their lips for their own self preseversation.

All you are saying here is that some private citizens were unsuccessful at challenging/repressing hate speech. The thread is about LAWS against hate speech backed by police and courts, the kind which would have limited Nazi speech.

No one was arguing there was "silence" before Hitler took power.

[Dill]

http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/12/trumps_story_on_jc_celebrations_is_finally_put_to.html

The Star-Ledger's story Monday offering credible evidence that some Muslims in Jersey City celebrated after September 11 will no doubt be used by Donald Trump and his supporters to justify the ugly lies he has been telling.

So let's start there: This was the most thorough examination of his claims yet, and it proves beyond doubt that Trump was way off base when he claimed that he saw "thousands and thousands" of Muslims joining celebrations.

Remember: The reason Trump's comments are so offensive is that he is suggesting sympathy for terrorism is broadly shared among Muslims in America when in fact it is a fringe sentiment. It is the moral equivalent of smearing all white Americans for the actions of violent white supremacists.

The most convincing testimony comes from a retired police captain, Peter Gallagher, who said he cleared a rooftop celebration of 20-30 people - men, women and children - and that some of them were dancing. In a second incident, two residents said they saw people celebrating on John F. Kennedy Blvd. near the mosque where Abdel-Rahman had preached. Finally, a retired officer says that several people called police that day to complain about a celebration on the roof of a building on JFK Blvd.

The testimony is credible, but not definitive. As noted by John Farmer, New Jersey's attorney general at the time of the attacks, eyewitness testimony without documentary backup is notoriously unreliable. That is especially true with cross-racial testimonies, as any Sikh who has been attacked as a Muslim can testify.

Farmer sent investigators to check reports of celebrations, and found none. But he concedes that it is possible.