Page 1 of 2 [ 31 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,161
Location: Australia

01 Feb 2018, 2:14 pm


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyoOfRog1EM

Credit given to Wolfram87 who presented this pod cast in another thread...

I find offensive the notion that someone else should decide what I can and can't investigate...
It is offensive to me, in regards to any subject, that I must be subservient to someone else who may or may not deny me freedom of speech or thought...

It is an absurdity that we are intimidated against judging for ourselves, on the basis of objective evidence provided, what is true and reasonable...

Once again I say, if what is being espoused is based on sound reasoning, then that rationality of thought will simply be reinforced when examined by reasonable people...

Achtung! Emotionalists are verboten to voice their opinions hieran, verstehen?!
Only reasonable, fair-minded people, who agree with me, are permitted to post in this thread... :mrgreen:


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,




Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)


Wolfram87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Feb 2015
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,976
Location: Sweden

02 Feb 2018, 2:59 pm

Always glad to spread some Hitch around. :)


_________________
I'm bored out of my skull, let's play a different game. Let's pay a visit down below and cast the world in flame.


naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,337
Location: temperate zone

02 Feb 2018, 3:07 pm

Hitch? Ya mean "Christopher Hitchens"?


The OP is apparently delighted that all of those nonexistent ogres who trying to stop him from doing sumpin or other, are not gonna stop him anymore.

Take THAT! You creatures under the bed!



Wolfram87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Feb 2015
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,976
Location: Sweden

02 Feb 2018, 4:19 pm

Right, cuz ain't no one doing nuthin' to free speech or anythin'. Pay no attention to the absurdly overreaching "hate speech" laws behind the curtain. We've always been at war with Eurasia.

"Hitch" does indeed refer to Christopher "Hitchslap" Hitchens. :)


_________________
I'm bored out of my skull, let's play a different game. Let's pay a visit down below and cast the world in flame.


naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,337
Location: temperate zone

02 Feb 2018, 5:40 pm

Wolfram87 wrote:
Right, cuz ain't no one doing nuthin' to free speech or anythin'. Pay no attention to the absurdly overreaching "hate speech" laws behind the curtain. We've always been at war with Eurasia.

"Hitch" does indeed refer to Christopher "Hitchslap" Hitchens. :)

"hate speech laws"? Is that what the two of you are on about?



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 71,207
Location: Queens, NYC

02 Feb 2018, 5:47 pm

A Nazi has the right to spew his/her crap.

I have the right not to listen.



Wolfram87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Feb 2015
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,976
Location: Sweden

02 Feb 2018, 8:21 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
Wolfram87 wrote:
Right, cuz ain't no one doing nuthin' to free speech or anythin'. Pay no attention to the absurdly overreaching "hate speech" laws behind the curtain. We've always been at war with Eurasia.

"Hitch" does indeed refer to Christopher "Hitchslap" Hitchens. :)

"hate speech laws"? Is that what the two of you are on about?


The UK is currently in the process of prosecuting a man for teaching a dog to do the Hitler salute. If these laws are so overreaching that they target what is essentially a prank, and involve the person in question in a multi-year legal battle over it, I'd say there's a problem.


_________________
I'm bored out of my skull, let's play a different game. Let's pay a visit down below and cast the world in flame.


Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,161
Location: Australia

02 Feb 2018, 9:04 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:
A Nazi has the right to spew his/her crap.

I have the right not to listen.


You are the last person I want to offend...

But can you see my point about being able to think for oneself?
Simply passively accepting what the overlords tell us a la 1984 is manifestly appalling to me...
This principle covers all subject matter...
Fore example, climate change...

Allow one to come to one's own conclusions...
A reasonable person will come to a reasonable conclusion given all the facts...
How could this possibly be politically incorrect on a level playing field?

I feel intimidated merely presenting my point of view here...
Could someone explain to me why I validly should?


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,




Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)


Biscuitman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Mar 2013
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,181
Location: Dunking jammy dodgers

03 Feb 2018, 7:17 am

Wolfram87 wrote:
The UK is currently in the process of prosecuting a man for teaching a dog to do the Hitler salute.


Fake news.

He is being prosecuted for 'causing fear and alarm and stirring up hatred on religious grounds' because it is essentially a video of him shouting 'gas the jews' and 'seig heil'. The dog in the video is irrelevant to the charge.



Wolfram87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Feb 2015
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,976
Location: Sweden

03 Feb 2018, 7:48 am

What an absolutely asinine piece of apologia. The dog in the video is the entire context in which the phrases are being uttered. He uttered those phrases because they were the most horrid things he could think of, because again, this was supposed to be nothing more than an elabourate prank on his girlfriend (I can't remember if the dog was his or hers, but he was training it to raise its paw at random nazi phrases).

By the reasoning you just presented, any given documentary on the Second World War or the Holocaust might be subject to the same legal battle, because they too would likely contain those phrases. Context is irrelevant, remember?

And that is the entire problem with laws such as these hate speech laws: they rely entirely on the perception of a recipient to determine whether or not a crime has been commited, and ignore context and intent. An offended party only has to show that their feelings were hurt by something someone said, and making the complaint is already an indication of that. The accusation is evidence of its own truth.

No threat was made. No statement of intent was uttered. No incitement of anything by anyone towards anyone else. To claim that he "caused fear and alarm and stirred up hatred" because he posted a video online (not sending it to anyone, just posting it on his channel) is tantamount to climbing a hill with binoculars to peep in someones window, and then be outraged that they exposed themselves to you.


_________________
I'm bored out of my skull, let's play a different game. Let's pay a visit down below and cast the world in flame.


JohnPowell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2016
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,806
Location: Palestine

03 Feb 2018, 8:06 am

Wolfram87 wrote:
What an absolutely asinine piece of apologia. The dog in the video is the entire context in which the phrases are being uttered. He uttered those phrases because they were the most horrid things he could think of, because again, this was supposed to be nothing more than an elabourate prank on his girlfriend (I can't remember if the dog was his or hers, but he was training it to raise its paw at random nazi phrases).

By the reasoning you just presented, any given documentary on the Second World War or the Holocaust might be subject to the same legal battle, because they too would likely contain those phrases. Context is irrelevant, remember?

And that is the entire problem with laws such as these hate speech laws: they rely entirely on the perception of a recipient to determine whether or not a crime has been commited, and ignore context and intent. An offended party only has to show that their feelings were hurt by something someone said, and making the complaint is already an indication of that. The accusation is evidence of its own truth.

No threat was made. No statement of intent was uttered. No incitement of anything by anyone towards anyone else. To claim that he "caused fear and alarm and stirred up hatred" because he posted a video online (not sending it to anyone, just posting it on his channel) is tantamount to climbing a hill with binoculars to peep in someones window, and then be outraged that they exposed themselves to you.


Really well put.


_________________
"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"


Aniihya
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jan 2015
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 771

03 Feb 2018, 8:11 am

I tend to use the confederate flag as a form of protest against authoritarians although I am a left-libertarian. I usually carry around the orange and black confederate memeflag around because it is a running gag among mutualists and left wing market anarchists.

Free speech and freedom of though needs to be protected. Even offensive speech deserves protection. Just because you find something offensive doesnt mean it is offensive to others. It is really easy to ignore people you think are stupid. Now if you want to beat up or murder someone for waving a flag, then you are an authoritarian and a danger to society and freedom.



Biscuitman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Mar 2013
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,181
Location: Dunking jammy dodgers

03 Feb 2018, 8:19 am

Wolfram87 wrote:
What an absolutely asinine piece of apologia. The dog in the video is the entire context in which the phrases are being uttered. He uttered those phrases because they were the most horrid things he could think of, because again, this was supposed to be nothing more than an elabourate prank on his girlfriend (I can't remember if the dog was his or hers, but he was training it to raise its paw at random nazi phrases).

By the reasoning you just presented, any given documentary on the Second World War or the Holocaust might be subject to the same legal battle, because they too would likely contain those phrases. Context is irrelevant, remember?

And that is the entire problem with laws such as these hate speech laws: they rely entirely on the perception of a recipient to determine whether or not a crime has been commited, and ignore context and intent. An offended party only has to show that their feelings were hurt by something someone said, and making the complaint is already an indication of that. The accusation is evidence of its own truth.

No threat was made. No statement of intent was uttered. No incitement of anything by anyone towards anyone else. To claim that he "caused fear and alarm and stirred up hatred" because he posted a video online (not sending it to anyone, just posting it on his channel) is tantamount to climbing a hill with binoculars to peep in someones window, and then be outraged that they exposed themselves to you.


You said he was being prosecuted for 'teaching his dog to do the Hitler salute'. That is not what he is being prosecuted for, I merely corrected you on that.



Wolfram87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Feb 2015
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,976
Location: Sweden

03 Feb 2018, 8:23 am

A video of him doing just that is the reason for his prosecution. What specific details of the video the Thought Police found objectionable is immaterial in this context. And given then level of thin-skinnedness on display, the saluting dog might as well have been the "offensive" part.


_________________
I'm bored out of my skull, let's play a different game. Let's pay a visit down below and cast the world in flame.


Biscuitman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Mar 2013
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,181
Location: Dunking jammy dodgers

03 Feb 2018, 8:26 am

Wolfram87 wrote:
A video of him doing just that is the reason for his prosecution. What specific details of the video the Thought Police found objectionable is immaterial in this context. And given then level of thin-skinnedness on display, the saluting dog might as well have been the "offensive" part.


He is not being prosecuted for teaching the dog anything. That is a fact.



Biscuitman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Mar 2013
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,181
Location: Dunking jammy dodgers

03 Feb 2018, 8:30 am

Wolfram87 wrote:
A video of him doing just that is the reason for his prosecution


In your opinion, but not in the opinion of the prosecutors, who when it comes to prosecuting someone, are the people that really matter here.