Octopus Overlords

hepcat wrote:Are you seriously trying to defend blatant racism?

gbasden wrote:Wait, you are comparing that to Twitter not banning people?

BWAAHHHAHAHAHAHAHAA!

Twitter has been a garbage fire for years. Jesus, it literally took *years* of horrific shit for @nero to get banned over the Leslie Jones racist shit, and most other abuse is never even mentioned. The only reason anything happened to him is that the attacks were horrific and were very heavily publicized. If neo-Nazis and #WhiteGenocide people can go unhindered on Twitter I'm not sure some dude calling someone a coon even registers. I'm shocked, shocked I tell you that Breitbart focuses on that and not the reams of other abuse that happens on Twitter daily.

Rip wrote:

hepcat wrote:Are you seriously trying to defend blatant racism?

No I am pointing out that much blatant racism gets ignored if not even condoned.

I don't care for any of it but don't care for the tendency to only attack only some people who do it while excusing it from others.

Rip wrote:

hepcat wrote:Are you seriously trying to defend blatant racism?

No I am pointing out that much blatant racism gets ignored if not even condoned.

I don't care for any of it but don't care for the tendency to only attack only some people who do it while excusing it from others.

MONTREAL -- A Quebec comedian has been ordered to pay $35,000 in moral and punitive damages to a young artist for jokes about his singing and his disfigurement.

Mike Ward also has to give Jeremy Gabriel's mother $7,000.

The Quebec Human Rights Tribunal has ruled Ward made discriminatory comments about Gabriel's handicap during shows between 2010 and 2013.

Gabriel, who is now 19, has Treacher Collins syndrome, a congenital disorder characterized by craniofacial deformities.

He is well-known in Quebec and sang for the pope in 2006. He has also performed for Celine Dion.

The judge in the case said two basic rights were in play: freedom of expression and the right to protection against discriminatory comments. He ruled in favour of the latter.

"Unacceptable remarks made in private do not automatically become lawful just because they're made by a comedian in the public domain," wrote Judge Scott Hughes. "Plus, having a such a platform imposes certain responsibilities."

hepcat wrote:

Rip wrote:

hepcat wrote:Are you seriously trying to defend blatant racism?

No I am pointing out that much blatant racism gets ignored if not even condoned.

I don't care for any of it but don't care for the tendency to only attack only some people who do it while excusing it from others.

But I very, very rarely (if at all) see you condemn racist comments by whites, I only see you post what seems to be a defense of those acts by pointing out that some random black person said something similar. It makes it look as if you think it's okay for white people to be racists as long as there are black people who are racist.

Rip wrote:
I don't do it because I hear so many racist things by blacks that I wouldn't get much of anything else done.

Rip wrote:
But @nero didn't do anything racist. Are twitter users now responsible for what their followers do/say?

gbasden wrote:

Rip wrote:
But @nero didn't do anything racist. Are twitter users now responsible for what their followers do/say?

Oh, right. Of course he did nothing wrong.

Why do you support these human garbage fires?

Here, a reasonable audience familiar with the context (Yiannopoulos trolling and attacking someone for clicks and attention, and playing to his hooting bigoted admirers) and with the speaker (Yiannopoulos as a hack troll, known for hyperbole and insult, whose followers often fake tweets as a means of ridicule) would likely not take the fake tweets as real, particularly when he fairly quickly followed up with a mock-surprised "you mean those aren't real?" wink to his fans.

I'm not saying that no court could find otherwise. I'm saying that's the most likely result, and probably the correct one under the law.

Remember: nobody needs free speech rights to protect admirable speech by people we like. It's designed to protect despised speech by people we hate. Yiannopoulos deserves contempt for monetizing bigotry, and his fans are loathsome, but his speech is protected.

LawBeefaroni wrote:Canadian comedian ordered to pay $35K for mocking a disfigured child singer.

MONTREAL -- A Quebec comedian has been ordered to pay $35,000 in moral and punitive damages to a young artist for jokes about his singing and his disfigurement.

Mike Ward also has to give Jeremy Gabriel's mother $7,000.

The Quebec Human Rights Tribunal has ruled Ward made discriminatory comments about Gabriel's handicap during shows between 2010 and 2013.

Gabriel, who is now 19, has Treacher Collins syndrome, a congenital disorder characterized by craniofacial deformities.

He is well-known in Quebec and sang for the pope in 2006. He has also performed for Celine Dion.

The judge in the case said two basic rights were in play: freedom of expression and the right to protection against discriminatory comments. He ruled in favour of the latter.

"Unacceptable remarks made in private do not automatically become lawful just because they're made by a comedian in the public domain," wrote Judge Scott Hughes. "Plus, having a such a platform imposes certain responsibilities."

Not sure where I'm at on this one.

Pyperkub wrote:

gbasden wrote:

Rip wrote:
But @nero didn't do anything racist. Are twitter users now responsible for what their followers do/say?

Oh, right. Of course he did nothing wrong.

Why do you support these human garbage fires?

Popehat chimes in:

Here, a reasonable audience familiar with the context (Yiannopoulos trolling and attacking someone for clicks and attention, and playing to his hooting bigoted admirers) and with the speaker (Yiannopoulos as a hack troll, known for hyperbole and insult, whose followers often fake tweets as a means of ridicule) would likely not take the fake tweets as real, particularly when he fairly quickly followed up with a mock-surprised "you mean those aren't real?" wink to his fans.

I'm not saying that no court could find otherwise. I'm saying that's the most likely result, and probably the correct one under the law.

Remember: nobody needs free speech rights to protect admirable speech by people we like. It's designed to protect despised speech by people we hate. Yiannopoulos deserves contempt for monetizing bigotry, and his fans are loathsome, but his speech is protected.

However, since Twitter is a private company, they aren't obliged to protect his speech while using their product as a platform, and I'm assuming Twitter has the right not to associate with Milo and his mob - to a degree, his speech (and his mob) reflects poorly upon Twitter as a medium, and can be seen as damaging to their product.

In other words, he can go find his own megaphone, he doesn't have any particular right to Twitter's megaphone.

Rip wrote:

Pyperkub wrote:Kudos to the Illinois Republicans:

The Illinois Republican Party on Wednesday revoked the convention credentials of a Donald Trump delegate from Chicago “for publicly-made racist comments and threats of violence” on a Facebook posting.

Illinois Republican Party Chairman Tim Schneider told the Sun-Times the party, “has zero tolerance for racism of any kind and threats of violence against anyone.”

The tweet:

The Republican National Convention welcome party was thrown Sunday at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum. Gayne wrote, over a photo of law enforcement officials on the roof on the iconic building on the Lake Erie shore:

“Our brave snipers just waiting for some “N—- to try something. Love them.”

Her explanation:

Gayne offered her “deepest apologies” in a statement, saying, “I strongly regret the offensive statements I recently made on social media. While I in no way intended to make racist or threatening statements, I now realize that they could be interpreted that way.

Uh, ok, what did you intend? Let's say hypothetically that you didn't intend to be racist, I'm still pretty sure that you are racist.

Well done to the Illiinois delegates for kicking her straight to the curb!

One of these days, hopefully other GOP organizations will do the same...

Unless she was black then it would all be cool.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/ ... nt-attack/

he Illinois Republican Party on Wednesday revoked the credentials of a Donald Trump delegate from Chicago who has used a social media handle of "whitepride" for "publicly made racist comments and threats of violence."

ImLawBoy wrote: I'm with Hepcat. I may think this comedian is scum of the earth, but I wouldn't support the government limiting his speech this way.

gbasden wrote:I don't think a lot of people believe that Milo's tweets were legally actionable, and Ken does a good job of explaining why as he always does. But as you say that's a very different standard than whether or not he was an innocent martyr that was unjustly banned by Twitter.

tjg_marantz wrote:CHRC is a federal body. Wtf do you think Québec had snuggling to do with this? The nasty show is held in Montreal. That's the extent of it.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

The Quebec Human Rights Tribunal has ruled Ward made discriminatory comments about Gabriel's handicap during shows between 2010 and 2013.

GreenGoo wrote:

tjg_marantz wrote:CHRC is a federal body. Wtf do you think Québec had snuggling to do with this? The nasty show is held in Montreal. That's the extent of it.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

I actually thought it was federal satellite situated in Quebec, if that helps. Thanks for setting me straight.

Defiant wrote:America's broken digital copyright law is about to be challenged in court

tjg_marantz wrote:So he's angry with the HRC that had nothing to do with it.

I'm annoyed he lumped Quebec in with a federal body.

He apologizes for doing so.

I apologize for not realizing it was the wrong body to begin with and it was a Quebec body that is being stupid so he's right in being annoyed with Quebec.

Ward will challenge and I expect Julius Grey will win the appeal and everything will end being much ado about nothing.

'Bout sum it up?

Speaking to reporters outside the hospital, CPD Supt. Eddie Johnson said someone walked up to the 44-year-old [bicycle patrol] officer and his partners to tell them about a man acting erratically.

They found the man talking on a cellphone, and when they told him to get off the phone, he pulled a gun out of his backpack and shot one of the officers in the leg, Johnson said.

The officers fired back, fatally wounding the suspect, who was pronounced dead at Northwestern, Johnson said. The Cook County medical examiner’s office said his identity was unknown early Friday.

The officer who was shot was able to apply a tourniquet to his own leg while his partner applied pressure, Johnson said. Fellow officers took the 16-year veteran in a squad car to the hospital, and his injuries were not considered life-threatening, he said.

David Duke, a former leader of the white supremacist Ku Klux Klan, announced his candidacy on Friday for the U.S. Senate from Louisiana, saying while he believes in equal rights for all Americans he demands respect for "European Americans." Duke, 66, is a former Louisiana state legislator and unsuccessful Republican candidate for governor who served a 15-month federal prison sentence after pleading guilty in 2002 to charges of tax evasion and mail fraud. Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump drew criticism in February for failing to quickly disavow support from Duke. "I believe in equal rights for all and respect for all Americans," Duke said in a video posted on his website. "However, what makes me different is that I also respect and demand the respect for the rights and heritage of European Americans."

GreenGoo wrote:Respect isn't a right.

GreenGoo wrote:Respect isn't a right.

Isgrimnur wrote:Same as it's always been. "SHOW ME YOUR HANDS!"

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is under indictment on felony charges of duping investors in a tech startup, accepted $100,000 for his criminal defense from the head of a medical imaging provider while his office investigated the company for Medicaid fraud.

Dallas-based Preferred Imaging LLC settled a $3.5 million whistleblower lawsuit in a case handled by the U.S. Justice Department and Paxton’s Texas Civil Medicaid Fraud Division, the head of which co-signed the agreement in June.

Paxton spokesman Marc Rylander said Tuesday federal prosecutors took the lead on the case and that the attorney general had no personal involvement. James Webb, the president of Preferred Imaging who gave Paxton the donation, did not immediately return an email and phone message.
...
Ethics and legal experts say Paxton’s accepting the money while his office investigated Webb’s company was not a clear violation of Texas’ loose ethics laws. But they said the donation at least had the appearance of conflict.

Webb is the most generous supporter of Paxton’s legal defense, covering nearly one-third of the $330,000 that two dozen people donated last year. Paxton cannot use taxpayer dollars or campaign funds to pay for his criminal case, and is instead using an exemption under Texas bribery law that allows gifts to public servants when there is a “personal, professional, or business relationship” that is independent of their official duties.
...
No criminal trial has yet been set for Paxton, who has twice lost his attempts to have the indictments dismissed. He is also being sued by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission in a separate civil lawsuit, which similarly accuses Paxton of urging people to put their money into a tech startup called Servergy Inc. without disclosing he was being paid by the company to recruit investors.
...
Webb is a low-profile GOP donor who has given more than $450,000 to conservative state candidates since 2009. Nearly half of that was $200,000 toward Paxton’s run for attorney general in 2014, when the former suburban Dallas lawmaker was elected to succeed Greg Abbott, who is now Texas governor.
...
Paxton’s alleged investor deception happened in 2011, when he was still a state lawmaker. He was indicted by a grand jury in his hometown of McKinney in 2015, just six months after becoming attorney general, and has repeatedly said he will not resign.

The U.S. Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee confirmed on Friday that it had been the target of a cyber security incident similar to other recent attacks, including the theft of documents from the Democratic National Committee. The DCCC said in a statement that it took immediate action and engaged forensic investigator CrowdStrike to investigate the breach of its systems. The probe is ongoing, it added. "The DCCC takes this matter very seriously. With the assistance of leading experts we have taken and are continuing to take steps to enhance the security of our network in the face of these recent events," the committee said in the statement. "We are cooperating with the federal law enforcement with respect to their ongoing investigation," it said.

Reuters reported on Thursday that the FBI was investigating a cyber attack against the DCCC that may be related to an earlier hack against the Democratic National Committee. The potential link to Russian hackers is likely to heighten accusations, so far unproven, that Moscow is trying to meddle in the U.S. presidential election campaign to help Republican nominee Donald Trump. The Kremlin denied involvement in the DCCC cyber attack. Hacking of the DNC's emails caused discord among Democrats at the party's convention in Philadelphia to nominate Hillary Clinton as its presidential candidate.

A federal appeals court on Friday struck down North Carolina’s requirement that voters show identification before casting ballots and reinstated an additional week of early voting, finding that legislators had acted with “discriminatory intent” in imposing strict election rules.
...
The decision by the Richmond-based court on Friday reverses a lower-court ruling that upheld the voting measures passed in 2013. North Carolina lawmakers overhauled the state’s election law soon after the Supreme Court got rid of a requirement that certain states with a history of discrimination receive approval before changing voting rules.
...
North Carolina legislators eliminated same-day voter registration, rolled back of a week of early voting and put an end to out-of-precinct voting. The appeals court ruling reinstates those provisions that civil rights groups, led by the state NAACP, said were used disproportionately by African-American voters.
...
The court, however, did not go so far as to return North Carolina to federal supervision under the Voting Rights Act.
...
The North Carolina Attorney General’s office did not respond immediately about whether the state would appeal the ruling. Gov. Pat McCrory (R), who supports the law, has said it would help prevent voter fraud.

In its 78-page ruling, the court said the state had “offered only meager justifications” in response to claims of intentional discrimination.