Nazis crippled this Englishman in 1996

>nigger
>neonazi
How's those modern puke-tinted glasses working out for ya when you're looking at past events

>deny something
>prison
hate speech

Attached: D_WnyMfXUAAJBSk.jpg (624x702, 90K)

Yeah, hearing the word "nigger" was obviously the cause of him being crippled. Fuck off retard.

It breeds white nationalism, and therefore is the direct cause of many violent attacks.

based anglos

she's literally normalizing nazism

Good

Locking up someone for 14 months because they don't believe some Jewish BS. If that was me at 89 the moment I got out I would get revenge on everyone involved.

Sure it wasnt just loyalists?

You don't hear abut all the white people niggers have jumped and crippled/killed throughout the years.

>hate speech
>high on hate speech
wtf kind of mind-control bullshit is this?
there are only two kinds of speech: free speech and unfree speech.
actions are not speech.
money is not speech.
words are speech.
no one, ever, has died from words.

>angel dancing on a pin head tier shit
there are consequences to hate speech, it fills the minds of impressionable people who then go on to act on it.
even in USA its illegal to yell fire in a crowded theater- there is no free speech when intentions are bad and designed to cause harm, as in this case

>When the Neo Nazi manace is so severe that you have to dig out a 23 yo incident to prove it

Attached: 1563520064596.jpg (500x500, 26K)

no.
you are wrong.
on all counts.
it's not illegal to yell fire in a crowded theater, that was overturned in brandenburg v. ohio.
words are words.
no one has ever died from words.
there is only free speech and unfree speech.
words that other people don't like are exactly the words that require government protection; why would friendly words require protection?

better yet, you make an assertion that there are consequences to hate speech.
that is a very incredible claim.
it requires incredible evidence.
therefore, let's test your assertion; i give you permission to use "hate speech" to kill me.
you can say whatever you like to me and i'll read every word.
after i read every single word, i'll tell you if you've killed me or not.
okay?
go on then.
kill me with "hate speech".
i'll read every single word.
do your worst.

>it's not illegal to yell fire in a crowded theater, that was overturned in brandenburg v. ohio.

Brandenburg v. Ohio in 1969 limited the scope of banned speech to that which would be directed to and likely to incite imminent lawless action (e.g. a riot)

you don't have unlimited free speech. so if you go say 'hey lets set this theater on fire'
or 'hey this Englishman is a threat, wouldn't it be cool if his life got fucked up?' you would be committing a crime. it just takes the political will to prosecute it.

kill me with "hate speech".
you have my permission.
demonstrate your thesis, user.

Why don't the cover whites who are fucked up by terror attacks in a similar manner?

Attached: Barcelona truck of peace aftermath.webm (352x640, 2.95M)

>no right to defend yourself
>no right to carry a gun
>blames "speech"

Get out, nigger.

Yeah agreed, I hate niggers but it’s a personal thing I don’t chase them down and run them over, yet.

Truck of peace was engaging in hate speech.

>speech

1) my assertion was that there is free speech and unfree speech. your research backs up my claim--speech that isn't free is speech that incites imminent lawless action under branderburg v. ohio.
2) i didn't use the phrase "unlimited free speech" you did
3) i'm still waiting for you to kill me with words--at this point i'd even settle for causing me harm. use whatever speech you want. you have my permission. do your worst, user.
your assertion that "hate speech" causes harm is on the line.

>from birmingham

In the U.S., speech is not limited with the exception of terroristic threats and advocating violent overthrow (both of which actually violate the 1st amendment).

Yes, you CAN yell "fire" in a crowded theater. If you start a panic, you will not be arrested for uttering the word "fire," you will be arrested for inciting a riot. You could be arrested for the exact same thing without saying a word, simply by waving a toy gun around, or displaying a fake bomb strapped to your body. The speech itself is not illegal.

You CAN be sued for your speech, such as claiming someone is a faggot, who is not. But you cannot be arrested for it. And there is a difference between tort law and criminal law, when you are involved in a lawsuit, you are not arrested, and if you lose, you have no criminal record...the government is a mediator, not a plaintiff. It is citizen vs. citizen, not citizen vs. the law.

We have the two above-mentioned infringements on speech, already, we do NOT want any more.

Attached: Eagle&Flag.jpg (474x296, 34K)

agree.
these infringements of our speech are bullshit.

and, i'm still alive and unharmed for the record.
so, what must be true:
this guy, , is wrong.
another possibility is that he's a limp-wristed, slack-jawed, effeminate, douche that's holding back after i gave him permission to use his worst words to hurt me.

i wouldn't be surprised if both were true...

with use of "unlimited free speech" I was paraphrasing you. "free" in the context you used it implies unlimited. I presumed thats what you mean by "free" speech since the opposite you used is "unfree". my bad for presuming a native English speaker can express themselves in exact terms to convey their point.
and yeah you were wrong on Brandenburg v. Ohio overturning prohibition on certain malicious "free" speech. Why you see being wrong as validation I don't know. perhaps les focus on wannabe lawyering more focus on knowing wtf you are talking about.
>it's not illegal to yell fire in a crowded theater, that was overturned in brandenburg v. ohio.
kill you with words? strawman, its about incitement and actions taken as a result of hate speech. although showing you don't know wtf you're talking about, on basic facts, is enough injury

you are confusing legality with harm.
i am still unharmed, by the way.
you have failed to defend your assertion that "hate speech" causes harm.

>you have failed to defend your assertion that "hate speech" causes harm.
strawman again, you're shit at this.
I said hate speech has consequences, which it does, as OP shows. Brandenburg affirms- literal incitement is illegal. so yeah, you're still wrong, some speech is illegal, and the govt. can regulate your 'free' speech when it sees fit.

what strawman?
i gave you permission to use whatever words you want to hurt me.
go on, incite action and hurt me.
i'll wait.
also, you are tacitly conceding that the words themselves are NOT what are causing the harm, but the actions.
the actions which were already illegal.
so, go on.
i'm still waiting.

The whole "fire in a crowded theater" argument was invented by those that wanted to show precedent for abridging free speech, so they could shut others up.

The word "fire" is said all the time in crowded theaters, sometimes by those in the crowd, sometimes by actors on stage or in movies being presented.

If it were illegal to yell "fire" in a crowded theater, how could you legally warn the crowd that the theater was actually on fire?

>Englishman

>it fills the minds of impressionable people who then go on to act on it.
Very very interesting.People are impressionable mindless mobs eh? I mean, i dont disagree but it s funny seein a ragin homo admit it. So now that we ve established, as you admitted, that people are easily manipulated by words and images we can safely deduct the following: the bigger the exposure to said propaganda would influence propotionaly more people. Something else we can also safely assume is that it is easier to make people(through words/marketing/propaganda) do something that is not illegal or something that will not make them outcasts(after all this is why they follow the mainstream narrative, they are gullible and they want to belong). What is becoming more and more mainstream the past decades? Shall we take a look at what the poor poor people that are defenseless against words have been hearing and watching left and right, 24/7 365 a year? "Being gay /trans lgbtqsuckmydick is not only normal but something you should be proud of and rewarded for". "Questioning a kike or critising Israel is not ok and makes an evil person by default" "Being a white European is nothing to be proud of. Quite the opposite you should feel guilty about it" "Immigration is natural, diversity is strength". Need i go on you motherfucking filthy kike(d-did you die) ? We can play this game till the time comes when i am razing your fucking temple to the ground again.

Attached: hfft0wi.png (744x559, 732K)