The Real timschochet

Yes because I challenge your assertions. Yes let’s go there, absolutely.

Yeah he’s making a lot of mistakes these days. You’re an even bigger putz than @Strike. And that’s hard.

It’s not a narrative. Musk has absolutely lied now several times: https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2025/02/10/elon-musk-pushes-false-claim-ex-usaid-chief-earned-23-million-the-biggest-doge-hoaxes-spread-on-x/ He’s simply not credible.

You begin with the assumption that the MSM is lying and that Doge is telling the truth. Yet whenever Musk is challenged, like on the condoms to Gaza story, he admits he made an error: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/americas/musk-walks-back-claim-us-intended-to-send-50m-worth-of-condoms-to-gaza/3479148 “Some of the things I say will be incorrect” lololol But hey I’m the gullible one around here, right? What a putz you are.

They cant do a “better job” because they’re flat out lying about most of the stuff they’re finding. Like the condoms to Gaza, the money to Chelsea Clinton, or money to Bill Kristol (the latest lie.) Musk is simply making stuff up knowing that people like you will believe every word he says.

Obviously you’ve read 1984 a lot because virtually every one of your posts sounds like Orwell could have written it. (Actually you sound most like Comrade Squealer from Animal Farm.)

And I agree with everything @Strike wrote. His first sentence, “schools do not have all the constitutional protections”, goes right to my point. There ARE exceptions to free speech, schools being one of them. Germany has decided that, given their history, the swastika is an exception to free speech. I think that’s reasonable. It would not, IMO be reasonable here. But it is there. And I don’t think it’s proper for our Vice President to scold the Germans about free speech. Nor do I think it’s a good thing for our Vice President to meet with a political group in Germany that celebrates the swastika and the ideas behind the swastika.

Don’t make me sad. Everything would be so much better.

Is eating raw fish supposed to be wimpy now? Because I love a good Omakase meal. I also love oysters. Doesn’t keep me from loving a good steak as well. And what the fock is wrong with owning cats? My cat will kick your dog’s ass.

As I wrote earlier, it was the United Stated that originally decided to ban the swastika in Germany. Germans have followed our lead. For them it was the right decision. But even here there are good examples of when it should be banned. For example, a high school student isn’t allowed to be on most campuses wearing swastikas or other Nazi symbols, mostly because it’s regarded as disruptive. Do you agree or do you think that, in the name of free speech, anyone should be allowed to wear what they want at anytime and anywhere?

I have never written that. I wrote it’s OK, actually a duty, to disobey laws that one regards as morally wrong. I also wrote this is extremely rare. Why do you lie about me all the time?

It wasn’t an analogy.

No it isn’t. And there’s no slippery slope. Ironic that you think I’m a simpleton on this topic.

It’s not magic. It just does. In a perfect world we wouldn’t ban the symbol, we would arrest everyone who commits violence as a result of it. But we don’t live in a perfect world. By banning the symbol Germany prevents the violence. If that infringes free speech so be it; that’s the price that must be paid sometimes to protect a free society.

You want me to admit that human nature is uglier than I had hoped?

This particular symbol, in Germany, causes violence to occur. So I have to disagree with you.

Refusing to obey a law is not the same as committing violence against others. I reject your comparison

Actually feel free to call me an idiot but I didn’t come up with this concept. It was the United States at the Nuremberg trials who developed the legal notion that individuals not only have the right but the DUTY to disobey laws they regard as immoral. Of course they didn’t originate that idea either; it came first from our Founding Fathers and then from the abolitionist movement. So if believing in this principle makes me an idiot then I’m pretty proud to be one.

What specific points in the article have been debunked?

Wants to? They already did: https://www.nea.org/sites/default/files/2023-06/30424-know-your-rights_web_v4.pdf

These are all very reasonable points. I normally disagree with a lot of your posts but I agree with you here.

Well you can. It’s just illegal. I approve of breaking the law if I believe the law to be immoral. That’s pretty rare but it applies to this case IMO.

Excellent points. They also want critical race theory banned from schools, along with books about gender dysphoria, and of course there is the Florida law banning any discussion of homosexuality. But JD Vance is fine with lecturing other countries about free speech because Germany dares to limit what neo-Nazis might say.

You are correct and the swastika is not illegal here, and it is used for Indian jewelry and in other ways. It IS however illegal in Germany because of its association to the Nazis. I think that’s reasonable, do you?

Your argument could be used against all forms of human judgment. Obviously power can always be abused. But at some point someone has to decide something. Oliver Wendell Holmes correctly pointed out that we can’t allow someone to yell “fire” in a crowded theater; therefore there has to be SOME limits on free speech. Who decides those?