Internet troll sentenced to 30 months in prison!

Quote from iIii:

Since when was Hateful speech protected speech?

Go talk to the Jew ADL, they'll explain it to you how they work that angle against anyone who speaks the truth, errrrrrrrr I mean anyone who is an anti-semite.
More...

ah, yes... the truth about the International Zionist Bankers who Rule The World? You mean that truth?

You should at least have the balls to say what you mean instead of hinting at it and then scurrying off, like a rat.

Go on, this is an anonymous board, it doesn't matter if anyone here calls you an anti-Semite. Go on, what is the truth?
 
eric3-troll.png
 
Quote from iIii:

I don't have clue what you mean. The topic is the concept of free speech. Who are the International Zionist Bankers who Rule The World? Are you referring to Paul Wolfowitz at the world bank? or Ben Bernanke at the Federal reserve? or the other Jews who control the European central banks?
More...

Yep, that's what I thought. You don't have the balls to stand up and say what you really mean. You have to hint at it with this

Quote from the latest whackjob:they work that angle against anyone who speaks the truth, errrrrrrrr I mean anyone who is an anti-semite.
More...

I dare you - go ahead and speak the TRUTH to which you refer. You don't have to be afraid of being labelled an anti-Semite here. It's anonymous, right?

10-1 he posts with some other evasion, and doesn't even make reference to the TRUTH he mentioned in his first post. Any takers?
 
Quote from iIii:

Since when was Hateful speech protected speech?

Go talk to the Jew ADL, they'll explain it to you how they work that angle against anyone who speaks the truth, errrrrrrrr I mean anyone who is an anti-semite.
More...

Lol. An antisemite used to be someone who hated jews; now it's someone who jews (or at least the adl) hate.

Nik, how about a simple truth like the fact that jews vote overwhelmingly democrat? That's about an innocent observation as one could make. Yet when a poster here, maverick, pointed it out once, a jew who no longer posts here, rs7, went berserk. How could mav say such a thing; it was absurd, it was prejudice; it was nigh on antisemitic. The point is clear: you're supposed to notice nothing about jews that characterizes their group behavior, except to affirm their suffering, their unique suffering, which outweighs by huge multiples the suffering of anyone else.
 
I oppose thought crimes and hate crime legislation. The state has no business telling us what to think. These laws tend to be applied unevenly, with PC offense getting zealous prosecution and minorities getting a free ride for such things as obvious racial violence.

That said, I wonder if this case isn't more like vandalism than a thought or speech crime. If the guy painted something on a sign in the family's front yard, no one would object to punishing him. If he put it in his own yard, I would say that's free speech. This is kind of a gray area. I think the court's decision and sentence were ridiculous of course, but perhaps we need legislation to draw more clearly the boundaries of where posters are allowed to rely on free speech and where we should respect someone else's virtual property rights.
 
and i think they're just fine... shame the retards don't understand them. case closed thank u...

"Judge Henry Globe QC, the Recorder of Liverpool, told Martin he had "trespassed and intruded on the grief of the Walker family".

"The intention of the website was innocent, honourable and well motivated," he said.

"You accessed that website and you abused its use. You posted highly abusive, insulting and racist messages on the site."

The judge said there were at least six messages posted on the website, but that he did not want to repeat the content.

Sentence 'adequate'

During police interviews, Martin admitted posting the messages but insisted he was not racist.

Heather Lloyd, defending, said Martin had no history of racist behaviour and that he felt "deeply ashamed".

She said: "He was isolated and living in a fantasy world, spending hours on his computer in his room where his persona could be as he made it, good or bad."

Miss Lloyd said that her client had written a letter of apology to both the court and to the Walker family.

Anthony's mother, Gee Walker, attended the hearing and speaking afterwards described the sentence as "adequate".

But Mrs Walker said she had refused to accept the letter after hearing what he had written on the online book of condolence for her son. "
 
I saw a business ettiquette book in Borders.

It's written for travelers and immigrants to the USA, many presumably nonwhite

It had a chapter on business social custums in the USA, and it commented due to the phenomenon of 'political correctness', that most people in a business social setting are very concerned that something they say will be seen as offensive to someone, and therefore are very guarded, hard to get to know, unlikely to tell jokes, and are extremely cautious about asking anything about someone they dont know well.

Doesn't sound all that natural, or healthy

Does it?

In creating an environment where no one has fear that anyone will say anything that will offend them, we've created an enviroment where people are afraid to say anything at all. So much so, that someone writing a neutral book about how to get along as a foreigner made a note of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top