Jean-Marie Le Pen’s immunity lifted over racial hatred charges

[Baerboxer]

10 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

Here's something from Alex Jones:

“I mean it’s not that Jews are bad; it’s just they are the head of the Jewish Mafia in the United States,” Jones said during Tuesday’s edition of his educational program “The Alex Jones Show.” “They run Uber. They run the health care. They’re going to scam you. They’re going to hurt you.” 

The difference is, I've never seen N. Ignatiev being quoted by supporters on these pages. But Alex Jones is often cited here by right-wingers.

 

Actually Jews were persecuted before the Nazis, for centuries in Europe, and ironically by the communists whose revolutions many Jews had supported.

 

Anti-semitism transcends nationality, religious and political persuasion.

 

[ilostmypassword]

6 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Don't feel ashamed, ignorance can be helped with education.

 

That particular person is a nasty racist who makes salutes to parody the Nazis at every opportunity and not for comedy alone. Whereas should any European dare to mock Mohammed or Islam then they risk nut jobs attacking them. But they are free under law to do it.

 

Other celebrities have gotten into trouble with the French authorities for making anti-semitic comments to.

 

The point is inconsistency. Once you start imposing bans on free speech, then you have to be careful to not to ban based on political opinions and allowing one side to use "free speech" as propaganda whilst gagging opposition. Similarly if you ban nasty cartoons or comedians which are anti-semitic then you can't allow anti Moslem, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Sikh etc ones. 

 

Either ban or don't - but be consistent, even and not favor what's considered "fashionable".

They may risk nut jobs attacking them but that's a completely different question. Or are you saying that these nut jobs work for the government? As for anti-semitism, typically it takes the form of attacking Jews, not Judaism.  So it qualifies according to the European use of the word as racism. If someone makes bigoted comments about Hindus, or Sikhs,   that's racist. If someone makes satirical or hostile comments regarding Sikhism or Hinduism, it's not racism.

[Baerboxer]

15 hours ago, Publicus said:

 

The courts decide. There are two of the kind: a judicial court and a legislative court. That is what each is. Each deals with the law from a different perspective, principle, purpose, rationale etc.

 

The European Parliament is a legislative court, aka, a general court. As always, they argue the politics of it, then they decide. In a judicial court it is also formal but it uses the books sent to it by the legislative court.

 

The issue is what to do with a guy who is a conscious and confirmed fascist...or Stalinist. Or Maoist...among many others of the kind. With a lifetime of evidence to prove it. In court and out of court.

 

In USA for instance, political speech is protected speech under the First Amendment to the Constitution. One can say a lot of vile things Constitutionally. Yet the Congress (and Potus) have as the general court enacted laws against hate speech which have scripted definitions, examples, illustrations.

 

A French court several years ago said an opponent of Marine LePen could legally call her a "fascist" because that is what the guy believes. Using the N word against someone however might be an entirely different matter as it goes to immutable characteristics of skin color, ethnicity and the like. Fascism is after all an ideology that is political -- and it is equally malevolent given one of its inclusively defining tenets is racism. To include the reality of what fascism has in fact done.

 

A major task then is to draw the line between that which is political and that which attacks one on the basis of immutable characteristics. Moreover in Europe, Putin is providing a certain funding to these far right groups in a number of countries, so when a Satan character introduces himself to the scene, the need of viable definitions becomes all the more immediate (and heated). Putin the Czarist-Chekist.

 

In the US, the KKK and Nazis are allowed to publicly parade, yes or no? Both offer extreme racist views, are anti black, anti semitic etc.

However if some one as an individual called someone a derogatory racist slur, that person could be prosecuted?  Is that how it works?

 

In Europe it is different. There is no first amendment's and different European countries have different traditions regarding free speech. But they should all be consistent in their approach. I don't believe that is or has been the case.

 

 

[ilostmypassword]

15 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Actually Jews were persecuted before the Nazis, for centuries in Europe, and ironically by the communists whose revolutions many Jews had supported.

 

Anti-semitism transcends nationality, religious and political persuasion.

 

That's not really the point though is it. You accuse liberals of supporting people like N. Ignatiev although he seems a very obscure figure. Alex Jones is widely cited by right wingers. Not only that, Trump is a regular interviewee on his show.

[Baerboxer]

10 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

They may risk nut jobs attacking them but that's a completely different question. Or are you saying that these nut jobs work for the government? As for anti-semitism, typically it takes the form of attacking Jews, not Judaism.  So it qualifies according to the European use of the word as racism. If someone makes bigoted comments about Hindus, or Sikhs,   that's racist. If someone makes satirical or hostile comments regarding Sikhism or Hinduism, it's not racism.

 

So making satirical or hostile comments about Judaism would not be considered anti semitic? How would you attack a religion without attacking those that follow it? Give us some examples of what you would consider acceptable satirical and / or hostile comments regarding a religious belief that's not bigoted.

 

Racism has nothing to do with religion by the way.

[Publicus]

59 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

In the US, the KKK and Nazis are allowed to publicly parade, yes or no? Both offer extreme racist views, are anti black, anti semitic etc.

However if some one as an individual called someone a derogatory racist slur, that person could be prosecuted?  Is that how it works?

 

In Europe it is different. There is no first amendment's and different European countries have different traditions regarding free speech. But they should all be consistent in their approach. I don't believe that is or has been the case.

 

 

 

European Parliament is reasonably consistent in these respects. The right in Europe, Russia, the USA just don't like that the majority of MEP's or others are elected or hired to do what they're in fact doing. That in most instances, judges are seated by the same process toward goals shared by MEP's or in the instance of the USA, the majority of the population.

 

Recall the European Parliament is a legislative court which argues the politics of the laws it enacts, and that the politics of the well known and always horrifying right in Europe are well known from a harsh and mortifying experience. Stalin was a monster but he barely got outside his own borders. Same for Mao and Deng Xiao Ping and his Tiananmen. 

 

In the USA there's been freedom of speech and freedom of political actions unknown to Europeans in their history and in the present. While USA led the war to defeat global fascism, we never suffered for it in the kitchen. Our casualties were living room or parlor casualties, if you will. We as a society didn't literally lose the farm or most of the entire family in the successful war against global fascism.

 

In religious terms, Americans who are Muslims don't have half the problems assimilating that attended 19th century Catholics, Masons, Mormons but for Americans who are Jewish, relief has occurred only recently in time.

 

Youse guyz over there on the right ignore that Putin is providing bucks to the right sector parties and other groups in the EU. While Putin is also interjecting himself into US elections and political parties with negligible effect -- at least to date -- Putin helping the European right to fund itself is a serious and severe offense against the entire European experience of the 20th century 1900 - 1950. To include the Cold War ca. 1950 - 1990. And Putin allowed little respite to all of us over on this side as he greeted Europe and the USA from the Kremlin on New Year's Eve of the year 2000.

 

In Europe the reality and the history require the right be regulated tightly and constantly within the context of the democratic societies that comprise the EU. In USA, we'll see about the uniquely American fascist right after the election, however, one can more than reasonably say their prospects are awfully dim.

Edited October 27, 2016 by Publicus
uniquely American

[ilostmypassword]

18 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

So making satirical or hostile comments about Judaism would not be considered anti semitic? How would you attack a religion without attacking those that follow it? Give us some examples of what you would consider acceptable satirical and / or hostile comments regarding a religious belief that's not bigoted.

 

Racism has nothing to do with religion by the way.

The Middle East has given birth to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. She should have her tubes tied.

Does that fulfill the your criteria?

 

And as I pointed out, according to the European usage of the word, racism, it does apply to Jews as a people. And if want to start arguing against the use of "racism" based on etymology, well, then anti-semitism shouldn't signify prejudice just against Jews but all the semitic peoples. Including Arabs. You want to go there?

 

[yardrunner]

On 10/26/2016 at 11:12 AM, mokwit said:

 

Still waiting.

A H set out in Mein Kampf his plans and theories for a new order and a master race which he tried but failed to implement after a large loss of human life both in war and in a planned program of extermination for many peoples not just the Jews but the Gypsies, Slavs and people who were suffering from various mental illnesses the same policies that were followed to a greater or lesser degree by Mussolini and others of the far left and far right in more recent times in the Balkans with the ethnic cleansing that went on in the 1990, s and as happened in Turkey with the mass deportation and murder of the Armenians and in fact whenever a far right or far left group want to gain popular support they tend to target minorities who they can blame for all the ills that are befalling their country and when that happens their is always a great risk of persecution and if the persecution starts it all to often ends in murder and ethnic cleansing