Katie Holmes .

[Jim Rosenthal]

Larry, hate speech is hate speech regardless of who uses it. The problem with hate speech is that it incites people to action. Language IS action- word do more than injure people's feelings; they incite people to violence and to killing and maiming others. Perhaps the worst thing about hate speech is that hate speakers are so seldom held to account for the consequences of what they say.

The Israelis have had this problem for a long time- the political discourse in Israel is astonishingly venomous- and one of the casualties of the venomous political exchanges was that someone assassinated Yitzhak Rabin. This is the problem I see with people like Ann Coulter. She isn't going to pick up a gun and shoot anyone. She doesn't have to. She can get other people to do it. You might ask me to cite a verifiable account of someone reading AC and picking up a gun and shooting someone, and I can't. But I do know from long experience that hate speech does, sooner or later, translate into action, and that action is killing and injuring people. What hate speech does is to make those who are its target less than human, and in doing so it makes them into justifiable targets in the eyes of those predisposed to hate them. And justifiable targets, sooner or later, are aimed at, and someone pulls the trigger.

Language IS action, it affects thought, and until we really understand that, we are going to keep repeating the same terrible acts over and over again. Not all of us, but enough of us that we won't ever have a peaceful and safe world. It's tragic.

 

[Larry L.]

Ah, I see. So "your assholes" are fine and dandy because they use footnotes, but "those assholes" are evil.

'Your words, sir, not mine. 'Wasn't my point at all. 'Guess I need to spell it out for you. When A.C. writes a book/article saying this-or-that happened, or that this-or-that person said X,Y,Z - she documents the source of her info so people can see it for themselves - in context. Whereas, some on the far LEFT never bother with "context" - in fact they avoid it at all costs so they can spin "the facts" their way...as in the famous "Surrender to me" ad...or NBC's carefully edited "911 tape" clearly intended to make Zimmerman look like a "racist"...or something as ridiculous as Harry Reid's outright b.s. statement that Romney hadn't paid income taxes for 10 years.

'Hope that helps.

 

[Larry L.]

Larry, hate speech is hate speech regardless of who uses it. The problem with hate speech is that it incites people to action. Language IS action- word do more than injure people's feelings; they incite people to violence and to killing and maiming others. Perhaps the worst thing about hate speech is that hate speakers are so seldom held to account for the consequences of what they say.

The Israelis have had this problem for a long time- the political discourse in Israel is astonishingly venomous- and one of the casualties of the venomous political exchanges was that someone assassinated Yitzhak Rabin. This is the problem I see with people like Ann Coulter. She isn't going to pick up a gun and shoot anyone. She doesn't have to. She can get other people to do it. You might ask me to cite a verifiable account of someone reading AC and picking up a gun and shooting someone, and I can't. But I do know from long experience that hate speech does, sooner or later, translate into action, and that action is killing and injuring people. What hate speech does is to make those who are its target less than human, and in doing so it makes them into justifiable targets in the eyes of those predisposed to hate them. And justifiable targets, sooner or later, are aimed at, and someone pulls the trigger.

Language IS action, it affects thought, and until we really understand that, we are going to keep repeating the same terrible acts over and over again. Not all of us, but enough of us that we won't ever have a peaceful and safe world. It's tragic.

Very well said, Jim. And I agree with the gist of it. However, one of the problems in this area is the fact that simply telling the truth constitutes "hate speech" for many today.

 

[Keith]

Larry, hate speech is hate speech regardless of who uses it. The problem with hate speech is that it incites people to action. Language IS action- word do more than injure people's feelings; they incite people to violence and to killing and maiming others. Perhaps the worst thing about hate speech is that hate speakers are so seldom held to account for the consequences of what they say.

The Israelis have had this problem for a long time- the political discourse in Israel is astonishingly venomous- and one of the casualties of the venomous political exchanges was that someone assassinated Yitzhak Rabin. This is the problem I see with people like Ann Coulter. She isn't going to pick up a gun and shoot anyone. She doesn't have to. She can get other people to do it. You might ask me to cite a verifiable account of someone reading AC and picking up a gun and shooting someone, and I can't. But I do know from long experience that hate speech does, sooner or later, translate into action, and that action is killing and injuring people. What hate speech does is to make those who are its target less than human, and in doing so it makes them into justifiable targets in the eyes of those predisposed to hate them. And justifiable targets, sooner or later, are aimed at, and someone pulls the trigger.

Language IS action, it affects thought, and until we really understand that, we are going to keep repeating the same terrible acts over and over again. Not all of us, but enough of us that we won't ever have a peaceful and safe world. It's tragic.

Very very insightful post Jimbo. Thanks...All you Paddock guys need to read this before sounding off...

 

[Jeff Young]

Jim, well said.

So Larry, in that list, which ones are Coulter "simply telling the truth?"

Or is she in fact spouting "truths" like "Jews are evil and should be exterminated" or "blacks are inferior and should be slaves" or "all Muslims want to kill Westerners?"

 

[Keith]

Pete, see what trouble this Katie Hopkins causes? Even if her name is changed.

You really don't need her in Oz mate.

On second thoughts, I reckon you'll like her...:idea:

 

[Jeff Young]

Very very insightful post Jimbo. Thanks...All you Paddock guys need to read this before sounding off...

Yes, they/we do because a fair amount (less than before I fully agree) of what gets posted here qualifies. Mostly, it is demonizing liberals/those on the left. And then Jim C, or me, or others, respond.

But a fair chunk of what Lonseome Bob used to post, and what Al posts and what Larry posts is exactly that. Hate speech. meant to Demonize the other side.

Pete, Mark, others, they are different and generally just post curmudgeonly stuff -- even stuff that sometimes makes sense! But we have a few posters, forutnately a small few, whose sole goal seems to be to get folks to hate liberals/the left.

THAT was, is, and has been the problem with the paddock. It's been better lately, and I greatly appreciate that.

 

[Larry L.]

Jim, well said.

So Larry, in that list, which ones are Coulter "simply telling the truth?"

Or is she in fact spouting "truths" like "Jews are evil and should be exterminated" or "blacks are inferior and should be slaves" or "all Muslims want to kill Westerners?"

See? There you go. You've just done what I said some far lefties do - you threw those supposed "quotes"(?) out there in no context whatsoever. I'd bet if we knew the context, we'd find out she was being sarcastic.

IOW, you've just done the "surrender to me" thing...again.

Now, to ensure I don't contribute to Keith's respritory distress any further this morning, I'm going to shuddup.

 

[Keith]

I agree with that Jeff. I am now (finally) beginning to see my way through the fog of US politics. It takes a while especially when you've really only got opinionated opinions from partisans to go on.

It is a destructive form of fishing, and it's been less of late I agree.

I will however delete such a post without notice in future.

One would hope that non GT40 stuff that gets posted in the Paddock is variously amusing, educational, informative or simply personal banter.

I have just posted such a rant concerning UK Fuel Poverty, but I can assure everyone that right now, I am the only 'victim' of that post!

 

[Keith]

See? There you go. You've just done what I said some far lefties do - you threw those supposed "quotes"(?) out there in no context whatsoever. I'd bet if we knew the context, we'd find out she was being sarcastic.

IOW, you've just done the "surrender to me" thing...again.

Now, to ensure I don't contribute to Keith's respritory distress any further this morning, I'm going to shuddup.

Semantics.

 

[Larry L.]

Semantics.

No. Reality!

 

[Keith]

Realty? Isn't that Jim Craik's dominion?

 

[Larry L.]

Realty? Isn't that Jim Craik's dominion?

Now, don't go a-starting any MORE 'H&D', you ole pot-stirring, no good...!!!

("H&D" = 'hate' and 'discontent')

 

[Keith]

Who, me? :smug:

 

[Larry L.]

Look around. 'See anybody else sitting anywhere near yuh? :squint:


'Heck with this! Breakfast awaits! BFN -

 

[Jeff Young]

I agree with that Jeff. I am now (finally) beginning to see my way through the fog of US politics. It takes a while especially when you've really only got opinionated opinions from partisans to go on.

It is a destructive form of fishing, and it's been less of late I agree.

I will however delete such a post without notice in future.

One would hope that non GT40 stuff that gets posted in the Paddock is variously amusing, educational, informative or simply personal banter.

I have just posted such a rant concerning UK Fuel Poverty, but I can assure everyone that right now, I am the only 'victim' of that post!

Excellent. I agree and appreciate your effortrs. I actually enjoy coming here to just to read stuff now, rather than getting called a "destroyer of America" because of my politics.

Take care, and thanks.

 

[Keith]

The eagle eyed amongst you will have already noticed that one such thread has recently 'disappeared, gone, vanished' from the Paddock.

After mature reflection and without prejudice the OP requested this action and I was glad to comply to his wishes.

 

[Jeff Young]

The eagle eyed amongst you will have already noticed that one such thread has recently 'disappeared, gone, vanished' from the Paddock.

After mature reflection and without prejudice the OP requested this action and I was glad to comply to his wishes.

I saw that, and good for Al. It is appreciated.

 

[Jim Craik]

Thanks Keith,

I must say I was sceptical when I heard that you were to be a Moderator of the Paddoc, but my scepticism appears to have been in error

Big improvement!

Thanks for your service, carry on.........

 

[Keith]

I do consider every act of 'moderation' to be a failure of some kind as I believe wholeheartedly in self-policing in my day-to-day life, and I do not see why the Paddock cannot run in a similar fashion with zero interference from moderators.

But you know, every now and then the kids get over excited and they have to get a slap or even a knuckle sandwich.