Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: [OT] German politician successfully prosecuted for telling the
 truth
Date: Sat, 25 May 2024 04:34:34 -0400
Organization: Ph'nglui Mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh Wgah'nagl Fhtagn.
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <v2s7qs$2q6fu$1@dont-email.me>
References: <20240522125702.0000756a@example.com>
 <v2obln$1ubc9$1@dont-email.me>
 <atropos-34D386.15435423052024@news.giganews.com>
 <v2ou1v$24ted$1@dont-email.me>
 <U3CdnSvI9LTfnM37nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <v2q9me$2ce49$1@dont-email.me>
 <atropos-0395EB.11531224052024@news.giganews.com>
Reply-To: fredp1571@gmail.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 25 May 2024 10:34:37 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="636b04eaaa0a72948ec6cdac77012ffd";
	logging-data="2955774"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19dfWCRgRImSQCIoio27T2O"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:78.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:wt9yxcPwVzOvvODfjUleg2f/RvM=
In-Reply-To: <atropos-0395EB.11531224052024@news.giganews.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 4095

On 5/24/24 2:53 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <v2q9me$2ce49$1@dont-email.me>,
>   moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 5/23/2024 10:53 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> On May 23, 2024 at 7:29:19 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
> 
>>>>>> 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?)
>>>
>>> No.
>>
>> Then I venture that you're purer than most. How do you characterize,
>> e.g., a speech alleging that Jews drink the blood of infants? Isn't
>> there a key difference to saying, e.g., Jews are Martians?
> 
> Cattle can be incited to action.
> 
> Humans are responsible for their own actions. You don't get to duck
> responsibility for rioting or hating or whatever by claiming someone
> incited you and you became a mindless automaton incapable of independent
> thought or action.

And our resident "lawyer" shows us yet another class he ducked out on.

> Rioting, Inciting to Riot, and Related Offenses
> 
> Federal law defines a riot as a public disturbance involving three or more persons engaging in acts of violence with a clear and present danger of damage to property or injury to people. The law includes threats of violence if those involved could immediately act on the threat.
> 
> Under federal law, inciting a riot (18 U.S. Code Section 2101) includes acts of "organizing, promoting, encouraging, participating in a riot" and urging or instigating others to riot.
> 
> The criminal code clarifies that incitement is not the same as simply advocating ideas or expressing beliefs in speech or writing. In order to qualify as incitement, the speech must advocate violence, the rightness of violence, or the right to commit violent acts.

Jesus, of course you can be incited to violence, and it is illegal.
Christ sakes...

-- 
"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC 
Bible  25B.G.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part%20II.jpg?dl=0

Gracie, age 6.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0