crazyhomo said:
i'm assuming this anti-semitic rant is meant as satire. either way i just want to point out that satanic verses was banned in many countries, and the protocols of the elders of zion was, and remains, a best seller in many countries (where it is also taught as historical fact)
"Anti-semitic rant". Well those few really deep words strike down any argument, don't they? By the way, I was focussing on jews, not semites as a whole.
Could you inform me about which countries have banned the Satanic Verses, and also in which countries The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was, and remains a best seller?
crazyhomo said:
even though it is a proven hoax, is believed by many to be an legit historical document
The hoax thing just doesn't stick with me. If you have a document that's written a century ago that details what will happen over the next century, and those things actually do happen, well, you call it what you like, but I really don't consider that a hoax. Hoaxes are generally unfounded and the things that were claimed don't actually realise. This is clearly not the case with this script.
Found this article just before:
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=4198. It provides a more detailed commentary on the Irving sentence.
Captain Gh3y said:
What's the difference, they're both crimes
Irving's teachings/preachings/debates/rants? are victimless crimes. Rape and murder are obviously more serious with physical harm. It's like one of us being arrested 17 years after we swore, because someone got offended. And I think that is a good analogy, since Irving never actually promoted any violence or physical harm, so he can't be accused of making physical threats, let alone actually doing anything nasty to anyone personally. He just believed that certain events did not take place, or they took place on a much smaller scale than the sheeple are lead to believe. So at the very most, he can be accused of offending a very, very small minority of ultra sensitives. For that he got 3 years.
