The judicial system is racist, and its the Jews' fault

[Velociryx]

ahhh, but no one took a swipe at a Jew's nose in this case.

a man talked about what hitler did to the jews and he called them a name.

that's all.

ever get called a name on the school playground, growing up?

might not have been pleasant, but I see you're still here, and no worse for the wear.

Me too.

and yes, I absolutely believe that my rights end at the tip of your nose.

trouble is...this guy didn't come anywhere near anybody's nose.

no more so than if I were to say:

"The Mongols swept toward Europe like a plague...they WERE a plague. The Europeans were right to kill thousands of them and send them packing!"


-=Vel=-

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Because you're arguing with your own straw men?

Really?

Okay, I ask again (for approximately the sixth time). Show me the numbers.

Show me how many lives this man's arrest and fining saved.

-=Vel=-

How many lives does arresting and imprisoning a man who killed his wife save?

It is a ridiculous question.

The man is being punished, not prevented.

[Velociryx]

Punished for what?

For having an opinion?

Again, that is FAR different from punishing a man for killing his wife.

The two are not even comparable.

-=Vel=-

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Velociryx
ahhh, but no one took a swipe at a Jew's nose in this case.

a man talked about what hitler did to the jews and he called them a name.

that's all.

ever get called a name on the school playground, growing up?

might not have been pleasant, but I see you're still here, and no worse for the wear.

Me too.

and yes, I absolutely believe that my rights end at the tip of your nose.

trouble is...this guy didn't come anywhere near anybody's nose.

no more so than if I were to say:

"The Mongols swept toward Europe like a plague...they WERE a plague. The Europeans were right to kill thousands of them and send them packing!"


-=Vel=-

Trouble is that you refuse to admit that racial violence targetting Jewish people is a problem currently, not only in Canada, but elsewhere.

[Velociryx]

But I'll rephrase the question.

Show me how this man's speech increased antisemitic acts of violence in Canada.

That is, after all, what the law is designed to prevent, is it not?

So if you can't demonstrate that it is needed by showing an increase in acts of violence after this man's speech, then what evidence do you have to support the validity or usefulness OF the law?

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

Sure it is. Violent ACTS against any group are problematic.

And we should go after the people who commit those acts, or who are actively planning to.

Making a stupid offhand remark to a reporter, however, falls into neither of those categories.

-=Vel=-

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Punished for what?

For having an opinion?

Again, that is FAR different from punishing a man for killing his wife.

The two are not even comparable.

-=Vel=-

Correct. That is why this doofus got a thousand dollar fine, not life.

[Velociryx]

quote:
Originally posted by Velociryx
Punished for what?

For having an opinion?

Again, that is FAR different from punishing a man for killing his wife.

The two are not even comparable.

-=Vel=-
Correct. That is why this doofus got a thousand dollar fine, not life.

You just ended the debate, methinks.

You punished him for having an opinion.

Thought control.

-=Vel=-

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Sure it is. Violent ACTS against any group are problematic.

And we should go after the people who commit those acts, or who are actively planning to.

Making a stupid offhand remark to a reporter, however, falls into neither of those categories.

-=Vel=-

We think we should cut the head off the cobra, that is why the ring leaders get charged, not just the hooligans.

[Velociryx]

Good plan.

Show me.

Where was he planning acts of violence?

Who was he inciting to assist him?

The reporter, perhaps?

The problem is...he has not, with his words presented here, demonstrated himself as the ringleader of anything.

He's a guy with a bad opinion.

-=Vel=-

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Velociryx
You just ended the debate, methinks.

You punished him for having an opinion.

Thought control.

-=Vel=-

Sure. The same way we control your thoughts about being an alarmist in a theatre, or about inciting a riot, or about urging the violent overthrow of our government, or...

Count us guilty as charged.

[Velociryx]

Ahhh yes! Except that yelling "fire" in a crowded building is not an opinion.

Minus that, your point is taken.

Minus the fact that this man was not inciting anyone to act on his behalf, your point is taken.

But then...minus those two things, there's not much left.

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

A general question for the supporters of this law and others like it:

Is there currently a move afoot to arrest author Dan Brown if/when he sets foot in your country?

If not, shouldn't there be?

After all, his endictment against the Catholic Church in his recent books were at least as damning as the statements made by the fellow who serves as the star of this thread, and far more eloquently written, to boot.

Clearly, he paints a picture of certain segments of the Catholic Church as being evil, immoral, and devoid of any redeeming qualities.

They are hateful, hate-filled, and ruthless.

Surely this then, might incite some weak-minded individuals to read these books and see an immediate, pressing need to take action against this grave evil.

Is it not then, the point (and in fact DUTY) of this law to arrest the author of this hateful speech on sight?

His words are (or, in the language of the law in question) *could be*, the catalyst that sparks violence against a defenseless subset of the population.

Very definitely a ringleader then, and one with an international reach.

-=Vel=-

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Clearly, he paints a picture of certain segments of the Catholic Church as being evil, immoral, and devoid of any redeeming qualities.

Clearly? Hardly.

I've read both The Da Vinci Code and Angels and Demons (unfortunately), and there's nothing remotely "anti-Catholic" about them. In fact, A&D is quite sympathetic to the Church and its ritual.

[Velociryx]

Actually, I was referring more to the Catholic sect written about in Angels and Demons...but then, in DaVinci Code, the Pope's assistant was not exactly a picture of purity...

-=Vel=-
(and another fine example, by the way, of good intentions gone horribly wrong)