Liste des Groupes | Revenir à ra tv |
Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:5/23/2024 2:38 PM, BTR1701 wrote:moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:On 5/22/2024 12:57 PM, Rhino wrote:
Once again, Leo Kearse hits it out of the park:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5uW1Htq7XU [10 minutes]
I listened to enough to hear the claim that truth is a defense
against a charge of "incitement to hatred" ...which, obviously,
it isn't.
As I said, the truth is now illegal.
But neither should citing the government's own crime statistics in a
discussion about public policy be considered "incitement to hatred"
merely because it undermines the government's immigration agenda.
As I said, an "incitement to hatred" needn't carry any lie.
And expanding on what I said, if you make truth illegal because you've
created circumstances that allow you to claim it leads to some nebulous
concept of 'hatred', then you've successfully muzzled all political
opposition and have created a dictatorial society where anyone who
speaks against you is criminalized.
And this all comes from the people who are constantly bleating about the
need to "protect muh democracy!"
Political opposition? It's far worse than what you've stated.
The justice researchers and analysts who compiled the statistics then
reported their finding are every bit as guilty of "incitement to hatred"
as the politician.
What about the police who made arrests who are required by law to report
ethnic and national characteristics of the perpetrator and victim? By
complying with their duty to observe and report, they too have run afoul
of the law.
How about a witness who desribed the perpetrator? Guilty.
How about the victim or complaining witness? Guilty.
How about the newspaper that discussed justice statistics? Guilty.
And this is a moviePig approved society.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.