It means it was a joke

Okay so you’re just trolling, sorry not going to engage. Hope your week gets better so you don’t feel like this is a good use of your time. Bye

What do you mean?

I think it’s like the distinction between art and obscenity

I agree in that its an inherently individual decision.

If it were, I’d largely trust UK courts to get it right (they are by-and-large capable of this, and much less politicised than their US counterparts).

What makes you think this?

I don’t think this was right

Nor this

Nor this

What am I supposed to say “no you insulting and attacking me isn’t true”. Like Chomsky said “The person who throws the mud always wins. Because there’s no way of responding to such charges.” All I said is the way I read it they’re saying “if this is true” which is inherently questioning it. That may not be what they meant, I can’t read their mind. But yes go ahead and insult me, there’s not point in me denying it and you know that, that’s why you said the insult.

Malicious lies bring less than nothing to discourse.

I don’t trust anyone to evaluate that is the problem.

you won’t listen to reason and literally deny logic.

Your reasoning is that that is the phrasing in formal logic. My point is how people converse doesn’t necessarily follow formal logic. So that may not be what she meant. I can’t say she definitely meant what I said- but that is the impression I got. And as I said if it’s how I as a fluent English speaker interpreted it, then it may also be how she meant it.

I read what I read. I’m not saying it’s definitely what she meant, but if it’s how I interpreted it, it may be what she meant. Language after all is largely fluid, and not a mathematical equation. But sure, just insult me instead.

“If that’s true” pretty clearly implies skepticism. She wasn’t stating a theorem. She was conversing.

In which case, perhaps unqualified “freedom of speech” isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.

I believe it is. But if you don’t that’s your belief, but at least admit you therefore do not believe in freedom of speech.

But she was saying if A. As in, questioning A…

From what I can see, yes. Libertarians are much more radical

I personally believe it is. Legally it isn’t in the US. But luckily courts are pretty hesitant to actually prosecute it most of the time

This wasn’t assassination though, the headline is just deceptive. It was just a lone psycho in Russia trying to kill another Russian. Not an international competition, like was implied in the headline. (Or at least that’s the impression I got from the headline.

On the internet it tends to come with the territory unfortunately

Yes, mistakes are made,

And what happens when mistakes are made? They are defended by the tyrannical government.

It’s like, “Yeah we falsely execute 10% of people, we don’t apologize to their families or anything, but it’s okay- many more people get what they deserve”

What? If I read news(not often) it’s usually, AP, Reuters, Reason, or something from Yahoo news.

Maybe it’s just that those are the most widely published cases of abuse so it’s easy when you’re looking for examples? But yeah personal attacks are good too.

I suggest you look into what Chomsky has said on it

She literally ended with “If this is true”

I believe you lied, I will now report you to the police. Even if it’s not true it’ll still make your life miserable

They’ve already arrested people for making jokes, arrested a kid for insulting an Olympian, and arrested someone for tweeting “the only good soldier is a dead soldier”. The UK government continues to be tyrannical and unethical.