Count Dankula is actually being convicted for a fucking joke. This is a thing happening. It’s actually happening.
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
For a fucking joke. A joke 3 years ago.
I have a 0 tolerance policy for Nazism. It the punitive punishment were left up to me, he’d be skinned alive and impaled on the city walls afterwards to be made an example of.
It was anti-nazi.
Teaching a dog to extend its arm in the mannerism of a Nazi salute upon hearing the term “Sieg Heil” and “Gas the Jews” as well as filming it watching Nazi propaganda videos of Hitler isn’t even remotely anti-Nazi.
He says he wanted to prank his girlfriend by making her dog the least cute thing possible. A nazi
It’s no prank that there’s a rising threat of Neo-Nazi and far-right movements in both America and Europe, where a Jewish community in France recently had their stores trashed and looted, where a town in Montana faced a wave of Anti-Semitic marchers and harassment, where a display in Washington DC at an alt-right rally showed a conference hall filled with people doing the Seig Heil salute to an adamant white-nationalist, where an innocent women was mowed down by a 5 ton death machine in Charlottseville after a far-right demonstration depicting homophobic rhetoric, KKK members, Anti-Semitic rhetoric and the calls for genocide, where there’s a current bomber indiscriminately targeting and kill black people in Austin Texas, when there’s a history of transgressions depicting similar displays countless for endless human right’s violations, indigienous holocaust, imperialism, and murder, I’d say we’re past the point of Poe’s law where joking is an excusable alibi for a monster who’s been prominent for centuries now. Nah, it isn’t a joke.
According to the German secret service, there were 22.471 right-wing crimes and 5.230 left-wing crimes in 2016. Of the right-wing crimes, 1.600 were ruled as violent, which includes, but is not limited to, rape, blackmail, assault, murder and arson. This is true for 1.201 crimes on the left. The categories completed murder, attempted murder and assault encompass 1.332 crimes on the right and 644 on the left. Crimes involving property damage make up 1.501 crimes on the right and 2.233 crimes on the left. In other words; right-wing extremists cause twice as much bodily harm than the left, whereas the left is more likely to damage property or ‘disturb the order’ (breaching §125, resisting state officials etc which also count as violent crimes). (All numbers available here.)
Left-wing and right-wing commit different crimes. The reason why many centrists and moderate leftists say that right-wing extremists are a bigger problem is because right-wing extremists cause a lot more bodily harm and that is seen as more serious than damaging objects.
That’s because the right-wing is out to oppress while the left-wing is out to liberate.
TLDR
Goalposts shifting. They’re now arguing over what political alignment is better and not about how he wants a man who made a joke to serve jail time, and expressed how, just like the Nazis, would have him killed. So yeah. Just ignore it.
Supporting my argument with the weight of evidence isn’t goal posting, shit-for-brains.
Alright. Tell me. What does any of the shit flowing from your keyboard have to do with why a man deserves jail time, and by your own words, death, for a joke. Tell me without spitting out all this bullshit that has nothing to do with this man as he has never supported any of the acts you claim he supports. He isn’t a Nazi but you keep calling him one despite you being the one with Nazi ideas for punishment.
He didn’t do any of the things you went on about, it therefore has no place in this argument. You want to turn it into a group thing when this is an individual. Try again.
Let me break down the elephant in the room for you. Let’s say there was a serial rapist brutalizing a town, targeting young girls, and periodically abducting them, raping them, and mutilating their bodies. Let’s say this serial, predatory rapist was actually known by the community but instead of being hunted down and persecuted and brought to justice, people were making jokes about it, condoning its actions, influencing it, and allowing it to continue and grow more powerful when it has a notorious history of untold horrors, Let’s say someone finally comes along and stops it’s web of influence and starts dwindling it’s control over the town so justice could be enacted against it? Is that really a bad thing? When those who assist it’s oppressive, beastly devastation to the community are dethroned and prosecuted for their compliance in their crimes against the community? Nah, you eradicate everything that’s enabling that beast otherwise you remain a conduit of atrocity and oppression. This is not a hard concept if you’re not a brain dead, inbred, cousin-fucking, mouth breathing, neanderthal retard.
Making jokes isn’t a crime. Prove me wrong. Jokes can be tasteless, but I refuse to live with them being illegal. I can disagree with a joke, but they should not be illegal. I can hate a joke and still not think it should be illegal. The difference between you and me is that I don’t think speech I don’t like should be illegal, because speech is a natural right.
Nice attacks. Do better sweetie.
Making an objective analysis isn’t an attack. Yelling “Fire” in a crowded theater is not an extension of free-speech. Even with the updated 1969 version of the law, it’s a speech that is invoking criminal acts. But that’s the American legal standard, not the Scottish. In any case, the law is not always the best indicator of what’s right but entertaining and invoking the prospects of holocaust and genocide, especially considering the historical relevance of such acts is speech that shouldn’t be protected. Perhaps this could change if such people who entertain such notions could vote responsibly and not be detrimental to the benefit or continuance of society. But at las, the problem with freedom is that it tends to intertwine with ignorance.
But I understand where you’re coming from. After all, there’s a golden rule to comedy; either everything is okay to joke about, or nothing is. I personally don’t buy his comedic excuse otherwise we could endlessly make terrorist threats against people and be held without conviction despite our intentions if we devolved into claiming it was for comedic value.
But if you want to test it, you could probably try making a threat against the president or something. Or inciting a crowd of goose-stepping Nazis to burn down the houses of Jews. I wouldn’t recommend it, though.
Yelling fire is illegal because it causes panic. A reasonable law. Making threats isn’t legal, just like planning murder is illegal. Causing people to burn down houses is also illegal because you actually told them to. Everyone is wrong in that situation.
So you agree invoking genocide and Anti-Semitic threats and atrocity is reasonably punishable by the law. Saying “Gas the Jews” is a threat. Glad you stand corrected.
(But Sheriff Derek O’Carroll found him guilty of a charge under the Communications Act that he posted a video on social media and YouTube which was grossly offensive because it was “anti-semitic and racist in nature” and was aggravated by religious prejudice.
Sheriff O’Carroll told the court he did not believe Meechan had made the video only to annoy his girlfriend and ruled it was anti-Semitic.
He also said he believed Meechan – who was supported at court by Tommy Robinson, former leader of far-right group the English Defence League (EDL) – left the video on YouTube to drive traffic to other material he had on there.
He added: “In my view it is a reasonable conclusion that the video is grossly offensive
“The description of the video as humorous is no magic wand.
“This court has taken the freedom of expression into consideration.
“But the right to freedom of expression also comes with responsibility.”
‘Intelligent and articulate’
Sheriff O’Carroll said Meehan was “quite obviously an intelligent and articulate man”.
But he added: “The accused knew that the material was offensive and knew why it was offensive.
“Despite that the accused made a video containing anti-Semitic content and he would have known it was grossly offensive to many Jewish people.”)
Regardless he was in violations of the Communications Act of 2003 and broke the law, particularly under the category; Sending a malicious communication using social media was made a criminal offence.
Although the law is not always the arbitrator of what’s just or good.
Saying a joke, and the joke was at the expense of Nazis, I literally already did a post about it that you can go look at. CONTEXT MATTERS shockingly.
Saying gas the Jews and actually wanting people to do it is NOT THE SAME as making a puppy do it to make it not cute! You seem to not be able to grasp that and at this point I am talking in circles of repeatedly saying how a joke is not illegal and should never be illegal. Telling people to kill with intent to kill is not the same! You can keep reblogging but I’m honestly done.
Your arbitrary insinuation is a grey area. Objectively at face value, it’s a perceived threat and malicious statement in violation of the communications act of 2003. Arguing intent when it’s not objectively observable is a double-edge sword.
It was a joke.
A joke.
What next? Do we lynch Paradox interactive for Hearts of Iron? Do we burn Google down because Google Play has that World Conqueror game?
Perhaps if you consider dismantling the Tories and the Republican party and denouncing every right-wing movement in existence through the use of subjugated force after stripping the capitalist class of the unearned wealth I’ll be willing to overrule his verdict, but those are the terms.
It is grossly offensive, it stuns me that anyone should think it is a joke. My immediate reaction is that there is a clear distinction to be made between an off-hand remark and the amount of effort that is required to train a dog like that, I actually feel sorry for the dog.
In many ways, the bit I found most offensive was the repetition of ‘gas the Jews’ 23 times rather than the dog itself.
His defense was that it was a joke and that he found offensive comedy funny which given the fact it was revered among right-wing groups and his trial got an appearance from Tommy Robison the creator of the far-right, Islamaphobic EDL,, the joke clearly reached targeted audience who agree with the Anti-Semitic and other racial, nationalist claims. Stating it is a joke also as a means of offensive humor also isn’t a valid defense if he knew the actual law in place, which forbids offensive and malicious speech to be share via social media as per the Communications Act of 2003.
PEOPLE SHOULDNT GO TO JAIL FOR MOTHERFUCKING JOKES YOU AUTHORITARIAN LUNATIC FUCK
Greetings! The name is Time Lizzy, or Time as my friends call me. They/Them pronouns. I love to try new things, draw, sing, dance, garden, and I do some witchcraft in my free time. I'm a Hetalia role playing partner if you guys are interested.
View all posts by Time Lizzy Saint
