By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
o_O.Q on 29 August 2019
Edit Thread
Bofferbrauer2 said:
o_O.Q said:

"In most countries outside of the US, freedom of speech doesn't protect hate speech."

those countries simply don't have freedom of speech

they do not have it ensured by law like the united states does, be good to mention that

They do have freedom of speech enshrined in their constitutions. You can badmouth or make fun of their politicians as much as you want for instance, but hate speech is still a no go.


Besides, it's not as absolute in the US as you might think, either. Try calling somebody a certain N-word for instance and see how that will work out. Or make fun of the cops while they're standing right in front of you. Or shouting fire in a crowded theater as a practical joke. Or curse on a forum like here, for that matter. And that list goes on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions

there was no violence planned in the video, they planned to walk near antifa expecting antifa to attack them

do you understand that there is a difference or not?

Yeah, no. Just listen closely to the video. They were planning about their weapons, equipment, their numbers, their positioning, if they are well placed to throw their tear gas grenades (the discussion about the wind direction and making sure it wouldn't backfire)... there's more than enough evidence that they were planning to beat antifa (or other such protesters) up.

Also, he's hanging out with right-wing protesters (or counter-protesters) looking for a fight with left-wing protesters. Of course at some point he would become a target, too if both sides clash. But he only reported on what the Antifa did to him and left the whole rest out. That's the same as if in 1941 journalists would have said that the USA are attacking Japan, and conspicuously leaving out that Japan attacked them first at Pearl Harbour to paint the US as the aggressor.

"it's not as absolute in the US as you might think"

I didn't say anything about anything being absolute

all I said is that there are protections in the constitution unlike many of these other countries where girls get arrested for singing rap lyrics for example

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-43816921

"Yeah, no. Just listen closely to the video. They were planning about their weapons, equipment, their numbers, their positioning, if they are well placed to throw their tear gas grenades (the discussion about the wind direction and making sure it wouldn't backfire)... there's more than enough evidence that they were planning to beat antifa (or other such protesters) up."

yes they were talking about methods of defending themselves when antifa invariably attacked them

In the video they clearly talk about walking near antifa and anticipating an attack from antifa

"Also, he's hanging out with right-wing protesters"

stop the presses, how could he

what do you think should be done about right wing protestors?

" looking for a fight with left-wing protesters. Of course at some point he would become a target"

how could she have walked down the alley wearing that so late at night, what was she thinking?

"But he only reported on what the Antifa did to him and left the whole rest out. "

the rest which entailed them talking about defending themselves?

"That's the same as if in 1941 journalists would have said that the USA are attacking Japan, and conspicuously leaving out that Japan attacked them first at Pearl Harbour to paint the US as the aggressor."

ok at this point i'm going to ask you to specifically point out where they frame their conversation as anything other than a response to antifa attacking them

if you can't point it out, ill just conclude that you're a waste of time and be done with you

i'll argue about anything but there comes a point where denial of reality right in front of my face becomes too great