Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: moviePig Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: [OT] German politician successfully prosecuted for telling the truth Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 11:03:01 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 72 Message-ID: References: <20240522125702.0000756a@example.com> <4-OdnQTEt7B6lc37nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com> Reply-To: nobody@nowhere.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 17:03:03 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e9250a95934dfcf62d9d60a7824d3f11"; logging-data="2504841"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19F57lSXauNhXJv1S5rz2NW1JMhjRJ4Rvw=" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:dE2jAoqXF1tch4HwliBleotbEdg= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <4-OdnQTEt7B6lc37nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com> Bytes: 4431 On 5/23/2024 11:26 PM, BTR1701 wrote: > On May 23, 2024 at 7:29:19 PM PDT, "moviePig" wrote: > >> On 5/23/2024 6:43 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>> In article , >>> moviePig wrote: >>> >>>> On 5/23/2024 4:35 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>> In article , >>>>> moviePig wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 5/23/2024 2:38 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>> In article , >>>>>>> moviePig 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!" >>>> >>>> There are enough laws, rules, regulations, and statutes in the world to >>>> allow anyone to be prosecuted for (or exonerated of) anything. The >>>> ultimate trial arena is always in the mind of the ultimate presiding >>>> judge. So, if you mean to defend against this "incitement of hatred" >>>> charge, you'll have to argue either that the very concept is >>>> unconstitutional >>> >>> Well, we're talking about Germany here not America, so >>> 'unconstitutional' isn't on the table, but yes, if this kind of law were >>> to be passed here, it would absolutely without question be >>> unconstitutional. >>> >>>> or that there's no valid reason it applies here. >>> >>> There's no valid reason it should apply anywhere. >> >> Yet "incitement to hate" is a thing you recognize and deplore. (Isn't >> it?) How is its subjectivity different from that of pornography? > > > https://video.twimg.com/amplify_video/1781169843351298050/vid/avc1/356x270/lHOICO1gYm5AAqF8.mp4?tag=14 > > Incitement to hate? Should they all be arrested? I don't understand what I'm seeing/hearing there. But, if you're objecting that a law against, e.g., "incitement to hate" is too subjective and prone to misapplication, that's a objection different to claiming that it has no semantic usefulness.