NationStates

Napkiraly wrote:Tbf I have lost all respect for the SPLC after they deemed Maajid Nawaz and Ayaan Hirsi Ali to be Islamophobes.

they're going after the daily stormer tho
you ain't gotta like the splc to dislike the daily stormer

I'm glad that Anglin will be getting taken to court, but why is a smear organization dedicated to defaming people they don't agree with politically the one taking him there, and not the Jewish woman he harassed?

I really don't like or respect the SPLC but more power to them in this case.

In the twilight zone that is the 21st century internet, you have people seriously, unironically, calling the SPLC a smear organization, and ignoring their very long record of effective civil rights work.

For fuck's sake people. You're not entitled to your own facts.

Trotskylvania wrote:In the twilight zone that is the 21st century internet, you have people seriously, unironically, calling the SPLC a smear organization, and ignoring their very long record of effective civil rights work.

For fuck's sake people. You're not entitled to your own facts.

I do think they made a misstep putting Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Maajid Nawaz on a list of Anti-Muslim Extremists imo

Going up against the first and overall hardest amendment and looking through the lawsuit itself, I doubt this particular piggy is going to fly.

Liriena wrote:

Minzerland II wrote:But that is exactly what it is. :^)

Not really. Free speech is free from censorship, not consequences. You can't be preemptively censored by the state for defamation, but you can be sued once you've incurred in defamation.

Is censorship not a consequence? :^)

Trotskylvania wrote:In the twilight zone that is the 21st century internet, you have people seriously, unironically, calling the SPLC a smear organization,

Trotskylvania wrote:For fuck's sake people. You're not entitled to your own facts.

"Wow people still disagree with me how weird. It's the current century guys come on. I mean yeah I don't actually have an argument and yeah I haven't actually disproven anything you said but it's the current century all my opinions are facts."

Trotskylvania wrote:and ignoring their very long record of effective civil rights work.

Despite your appeal to current century it appears you are unfamiliar with the concept of linear time and think that an organization's actions in the past excuse it from wrongdoings today.

I am pro-free speech, but there is a clear distinction between criticising the government and religion, and inciting racial hatred.

I've been watching a bunch of videos about the Sovereign Citizen Movement yesterday (or in the Commonwealth, Freemen on the Land). I realise how vulnerable I am to being taken in by their emotion-inducing stories.

Minzerland II wrote:

Liriena wrote:Not really. Free speech is free from censorship, not consequences. You can't be preemptively censored by the state for defamation, but you can be sued once you've incurred in defamation.

Is censorship not a consequence? :^)

State censorship is a consequence, sure, but not an acceptable one.

Liriena wrote:

Minzerland II wrote:Is censorship not a consequence? :^)

State censorship is a consequence, sure, but not an acceptable one.

What makes an acceptable consequence?

We need somewhere to discuss the SPLC in general.

Hey! The SPLC is doing something I don't find terrible. Would you look at that...

Trotskylvania wrote:In the twilight zone that is the 21st century internet, you have people seriously, unironically, calling the SPLC a smear organization, and ignoring their very long record of effective civil rights work.

For fuck's sake people. You're not entitled to your own facts.

"effective civil rights work"

For fuck's sake Trotskylvania, you're not entitled to your own facts.

Herskerstad wrote:Going up against the first and overall hardest amendment and looking through the lawsuit itself, I doubt this particular piggy is going to fly.

Very hard.

FelrikTheDeleted wrote:

Herskerstad wrote:Going up against the first and overall hardest amendment and looking through the lawsuit itself, I doubt this particular piggy is going to fly.

Very hard.

I mean I am impressed by the compilation as it carries some serious legal thrift behind its wording, but much of it are points that are doomed to be counteracted, will be impossible to prove or easily be smokescreened by any semi-decent lawyer worth their salt. To put the difficulty into perspective, WBC's trolling campaign against the families of dead soldiers with personal mails and things that certainly crossed into direct personal communication which crossed just about every normative, but only really touched on a couple of legal issues which was defeated soundly in the supreme court going 8-1. That was with all the names, numbers, ect made available. This is not much worse and it's going to be a logistical nightmare to tie name, faces to most of what happened, and attempting to mold it as terror tactics? Not going to fly. I mean technically any chance with the right judge and jury can be won, but this one seems stillborn.

Kubra wrote:

Napkiraly wrote:Tbf I have lost all respect for the SPLC after they deemed Maajid Nawaz and Ayaan Hirsi Ali to be Islamophobes.

they're going after the daily stormer tho
you ain't gotta like the splc to dislike the daily stormer

Of course. I support the SPLC in this particular endeavor.

Napkiraly wrote:

Kubra wrote: they're going after the daily stormer tho
you ain't gotta like the splc to dislike the daily stormer

Of course. I support the SPLC in this particular endeavor.

and dislike of the daily stormer is something that ought to unit us all, right or left.

Kubra wrote:

Napkiraly wrote:Of course. I support the SPLC in this particular endeavor.

and dislike of the daily stormer is something that ought to unit us all, right or left.

Bring the storm of hell down upon them once again.

Liriena wrote:I wish the SPLC the best of luck against those Nazi twits. Free speech is not speech free of consequences, and when the things you say hurt or endanger innocents, specially in the form of hate speech, you deserve to face severe consequences.

While I share the former sentiment. I strongly disagree with the latter.

Hate Speech is at best a bit of pernicious propaganda earnestly believed. At it's worst it's a fascist assault upon freedom of speech.

Secondly, while words can hurt, that power is commensurate with the power you give the speaker. You ALLOW them to hurt. Revoke that permission and suddenly it stops hurting.

Telconi wrote:Hey! The SPLC is doing something I don't find terrible. Would you look at that...

Trotskylvania wrote:In the twilight zone that is the 21st century internet, you have people seriously, unironically, calling the SPLC a smear organization, and ignoring their very long record of effective civil rights work.

For fuck's sake people. You're not entitled to your own facts.

"effective civil rights work"

For fuck's sake Trotskylvania, you're not entitled to your own facts.

On what planet do you spend most your time?