Winchester Posted September 27, 2012 Share Posted September 27, 2012 [quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1348620173' post='2486732'] Pravda means truth. Thank you for your ringing endorsement of the US press. In Russian, that is. In Bosnian-Croatian-Serbian it means justice. Either way it's still a pretty ringing endorsement. [/quote] From a friend: [quote][font="arial"][size="2"][color="black"][font="arial"][size="2"][color="black"][font="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"]"Pravda" is the name of the Soviet State newspaper which printed anything but "Pravda," and as such, it is no endorsement. Izvestia was the other State-run newspaper. It was Russian for "News." They were both so notorious for printing lies for the State that the Russian people came up with a little expression: "There is no Pravda in Izvestia, and no Izvestia in Pravda." [/font][/color][/size][/font][/color][/size][/font][/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted September 27, 2012 Share Posted September 27, 2012 [quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1348620173' post='2486732'] Pravda means truth. Thank you for your ringing endorsement of the US press. In Russian, that is. In Bosnian-Croatian-Serbian it means justice. Either way it's still a pretty ringing endorsement. [/quote] From a friend: [quote][font="arial"][size="2"][color="black"][font="arial"][size="2"][color="black"][font="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"]"Pravda" is the name of the Soviet State newspaper which printed anything but "Pravda," and as such, it is no endorsement. Izvestia was the other State-run newspaper. It was Russian for "News." They were both so notorious for printing lies for the State that the Russian people came up with a little expression: "There is no Pravda in Izvestia, and no Izvestia in Pravda." [/font][/color][/size][/font][/color][/size][/font][/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted September 27, 2012 Share Posted September 27, 2012 [quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1348705156' post='2487095'] From a friend: [/quote] These are lies propagated by the Whitist Finns in a pathetic attempt to discredit the worker's revolution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted September 27, 2012 Share Posted September 27, 2012 Now the film-maker is under arrest. Obama Admistration ≠Free Speach Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 [quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1348785166' post='2487403'] Now the film-maker is under arrest. Obama Admistration ≠Free Speach [/quote] On what charge? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ardillacid Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 Complete, utter lack of talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 [quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1348792953' post='2487451'] On what charge? [/quote] I'd heard he had outstanding warrants, already. For what, I don't know. I lost interest before finishing the article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 According to the AP it was violating his parole. he committed fraud and a stipulation of his probation was to not use the computer or internet without getting the ok of his probation officer. [url="http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/09/27/man-behind-anti-islam-film-arrested-authorities-say/"]http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/09/27/man-behind-anti-islam-film-arrested-authorities-say/[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 [quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1348793942' post='2487456'] According to the AP it was violating his parole. he committed fraud and a stipulation of his probation was to not use the computer or internet without getting the ok of his probation officer. [url="http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/09/27/man-behind-anti-islam-film-arrested-authorities-say/"]http://www.foxnews.c...uthorities-say/[/url] [/quote] That sounds familiar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 [quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1348793942' post='2487456'] According to the AP it was violating his parole. he committed fraud and a stipulation of his probation was to not use the computer or internet without getting the ok of his probation officer. [url="http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/09/27/man-behind-anti-islam-film-arrested-authorities-say/"]http://www.foxnews.c...uthorities-say/[/url] [/quote] This is a way to punish him for his involvement with an offensive but otherwise protect form of free speech. The Feds brought him in for questioning about the video, it stands to reason they wanted to find some way to charge him for his involment in this offense speech. They found their loophole to the First Amendment, HURRAY FOR FREEDOM!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 [quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1348795179' post='2487466'] This is a way to punish him for his involvement with an offensive but otherwise protect form of free speech. The Feds brought him in for questioning about the video, it stands to reason they wanted to find some way to charge him for his involment in this offense speech. They found their loophole to the First Amendment, HURRAY FOR FREEDOM!!! [/quote] That's a pretty big assumption. It seems pretty indisputable that he is guilty of violating his parole. Are you saying that they shouldn't charge him for a probation stipulation, which was put on him prior to this video was created and had nothing to do with any attempt to limit his right to produce offensive speech, because that violation took the form of offensive speech? If they were just throwing mud at the wall to see what stuck, trying every possible legal maneuver to lock him up, then I would agree with you, but this seems to be a pretty straightforward violation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1348795552' post='2487469'] That's a pretty big assumption. It seems pretty indisputable that he is guilty of violating his parole. Are you saying that they shouldn't charge him for a probation stipulation, which was put on him prior to this video was created and had nothing to do with any attempt to limit his right to produce offensive speech, because that violation took the form of offensive speech? If they were just throwing mud at the wall to see what stuck, trying every possible legal maneuver to lock him up, then I would agree with you, but this seems to be a pretty straightforward violation. [/quote] It just seems really unreasonable and naive to believe his arrest is not actually about his video, a form of free speech, offending people. But believe as you see fit. Edited September 28, 2012 by KnightofChrist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 [quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1348795989' post='2487470'] It just seems really unreasonable and naive to believe his arrest is not actually about his video, a form of free speech, offending people. But believe as you see fit. [/quote] It is about his video since making that video violated the terms of his parole. Not because of the content but because of the medium. I'm really not the one making a positive claim here. I'm not saying that the trouble that the video caused had nothing to do with their decision. I have no idea. That's require some serious analysis of the probation office's stats. I'm just saying that you are making an assumption about the motive for the arrest that really isn't proven by the evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 [quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1348796206' post='2487473'] It is about his video since making that video violated the terms of his parole. Not because of the content but because of the medium. I'm really not the one making a positive claim here. I'm not saying that the trouble that the video caused had nothing to do with their decision. I have no idea. That's require some serious analysis of the probation office's stats. I'm just saying that you are making an assumption about the motive for the arrest that really isn't proven by the evidence. [/quote] Loophole hurray freedom! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 [quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1348796528' post='2487474'] Loophole hurray freedom! [/quote] I guess you've decided to stop arguing your point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now