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

[GePap]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Thomas Jefferson not only said we need a revolution every 20 years (generation), he wrote about the potential necessity for overthrowing the government in the Declaration of Independence. Hate speech? A Crime?

NO, since he is saying "the system" needs to be changed.

If he had said "we need to kill some darkies every few years to keep them in line", now that is hate speech.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by General Ludd
He is only being convicted because he is a (former?) first-nations leader.

Any average person wouldn't face charges for saying something like that, and 'main stream' politicians usually have immunity to such things and wouldn't have to face anything except the media.

Really? Is Ernst Zundel a first-nations leader?

As for your politicians blurb. That's bull ****. They would face harsher, and swifter action.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Velociryx
The point, gentlemen, is that everybody who is so against this fellow's position and opinion, is tripping all overthemselves to say how tolerant they are, while displaying gross INTOLERENCE for this individual's position (as evidenced by the burning desire to shut him up). Thus, Dark Cloud's statement.

Funny that you mention burning.

It is our extention of the yelling fire in a crowded theatre principle.

Nobody, anywhere, has unfettered right to say anything and everything they like.

We may differ on where to draw the line, but we all have these lines.

[notyoueither]

People might also like to take into account that there are crimes against Jewish people and property based on racial hatred being committed in Canada on a current basis.

We're not talking about some hypothetical situation where someone might be harmed.

We are talking about an actual situation in which people are being harmed by loons who listen to pieces of **** like the one recently prosecuted.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Thomas Jefferson not only said we need a revolution every 20 years (generation), he wrote about the potential necessity for overthrowing the government in the Declaration of Independence. Hate speech? A Crime?

The hate laws don't protect political parties or our government or the form of our government. They protect identifiable groups based on 'colour, race, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation.'

[notyoueither]

Show me the ****er saying 'Indians were a disease and the US cavalry were trying to clean up the world when they fried a million of those guys'...

I'll lead the march to demand prosecution.

The ******* will get a thousand dollar fine.

Boo hoo!

[St Leo]

NYE

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Velociryx
....and that's how it always starts.

People come up with such wonderful justifications for banning this or that.

For restricting our rights to speak openly (in the name of fairness and justice, mind you...always that).

And how does it end?

Well, history is a pretty fair guide.

I'll pass, thanks.

I much prefer allowing people the freedom to say something I might not like, over arbitrary bannings of any type. It is little more than a crude attempt at thought control.

-=Vel=-

Then flag burning is a completely legitimate form of free speech (which I already believe to be the case).

[KrazyHorse]

NYE

[notyoueither]

What have you lost, KrazyHorse? You mourn the loss of your 'right' to incite violence against minorities?

[KrazyHorse]

Inciting hatred is different than inciting violence, in my opinion.

Though when Ashekanew(?) praised the extermination of a people he crossed from one to the other.

In other words, I don't believe that speech which makes no mention of violent acts based on hatred of an identifiable group should be prohibited.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by MrFun
Then flag burning is a completely legitimate form of free speech (which I already believe to be the case).

Indeed

And it needs to be protected.

At the very least we know these Canadians share at least one thing in common with far right Republicans.... a disapproval of the platform of the ACLU

[KrazyHorse]

I'm one of the leftmost Canadians around, but I'm on your side

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Inciting hatred is different than inciting violence, in my opinion.

Though when Ashekanew(?) praised the extermination of a people he crossed from one to the other.

In other words, I don't believe that speech which makes no mention of violent acts based on hatred of an identifiable group should be prohibited.

To bad he mentioned the violent acts, and seemed to approve of them.

[KrazyHorse]

That's what I said.

But I don't believe that we should be prohibiting simple hate speech (which requires no mention of violence AFAIK)