Politics Vote for a president of USA - 2016 election

[Maleth]

I suppose that extremism is in the eye of the beholder. "Normal practicing" of Islam says that I both deserve and shall receive an eternity of torture when I die. Their scripture commands them to make war upon me unless I submit to their religion. Is that "hate speech?"

Indeed. That is against the supreme law of the country. Its inciting hate and also violence to people who do not share these values. Moderate muslims have ways to get around that. There are various texts in the Quran like the Bible that contradicts itself so they can become compatible with the laws of free societies. So does the Torah by the way. (which the Quran is based on to a large part). I dont ever see Jews going round in the streets saying they need to start killing people because Jahwe said so. Chose your personalit and find somethings that fits with it in the holy texts.

If so, do you believe that Islam should be legal, or do you still believe that "hate speech" should be proscribed? Can one allow the practice of Islam while prescribing its holy text?

Islam like Christianity and Judaism and any other religion could be legal if it denounces hate speech and incite violence. Its been updated by logical people. Other wise no its not compatable in the year 2016.

I'm sure you're aware that reading the Qu'ran is about as "normally practicing" as you can get in Islam, including reading it during services. Sneak into a jum'ah (it's not hard) and listen. There's generally some reading of the Qu'ran...

Same with Torah and Bible. If they can do it, why not Radical and extremist Muslims?

So you support the banning of Islam? Its major sects have no "some of these laws were changed in a new covenant" concept like Christianity. The Qu'ran is the holy word of their god, as dictated to the final prophet by an angel. And that's not even touching ahadith.

From my perspective, it's quite silly, but it's a facet of their religion. I don't think they should be barred from believing it or speaking of it. In line with the way my country tends to deal with these things, I tend to think it's when they stop talking about how I should be punished and actually try to punish me, or make a specific call to punish me beyond the vague "as the book says, he's guilty of mushrik and should be punished!" bit that action should be taken.

answered

Again, much of Europe seems very hypocritical in this. They allow special privileges of "hate speech" for Muslims that the previous ethnic populations do not enjoy.

Would you be happy to allow it in the US if this happens there in a freedom exercise as you are proposing?

 

[DejaVu]

Saul Alinsky was one of Hillary Clinton´s greatly admired heroes and mentors, a luciferian.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jVbbOdXaRE


Ben Carson about Hillary Clinton
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...en-carson-said-about-hillary-clinton-saul-al/

"Now, one of the things that I have learned about Hillary Clinton is that one of her heroes, her mentors was Saul Alinsky. And her senior thesis was about Saul Alinsky. This was someone she greatly admired and let me tell you something about Saul Alinsky," Carson said.
"He wrote a book called Rules for Radicals. It acknowledges Lucifer, the original radical who gained his own kingdom. Now think about that. This is our nation where our founding document, the Declaration of Independence talks about certain inalienable rights that come from our creator, a nation where our Pledge of Allegiance says we are ‘One nation under God.’ This is a nation where every coin in our pockets and every bill in our wallet says, ‘In God We Trust.’ So are we willing to elect someone as president who has as their role model somebody who acknowledges Lucifer? Think about that."


Saul Alinsky’s 12 Rules for Radicals
http://www.bestofbeck.com/wp/activism/saul-alinskys-12-rules-for-radicals

Here is the complete list from Alinsky.

* RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood. (These are two things of which there is a plentiful supply. Government and corporations always have a difficult time appealing to people, and usually do so almost exclusively with economic arguments.)

* RULE 2: “Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone. (Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don’t address the “real” issues. This is why. They avoid things with which they have no knowledge.)

* RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)

* RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity’s very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)

* RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)

* RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones. (Radical activists, in this sense, are no different that any other human being. We all avoid “un-fun” activities, and but we revel at and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.)

* RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)

* RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)

* RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist. (Perception is reality. Large organizations always prepare a worst-case scenario, something that may be furthest from the activists’ minds. The upshot is that the organization will expend enormous time and energy, creating in its own collective mind the direst of conclusions. The possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.)

* RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog. (Unions used this tactic. Peaceful [albeit loud] demonstrations during the heyday of unions in the early to mid-20th Century incurred management’s wrath, often in the form of violence that eventually brought public sympathy to their side.)

* RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem. (Old saw: If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem. Activist organizations have an agenda, and their strategy is to hold a place at the table, to be given a forum to wield their power. So, they have to have a compromise solution.)

* RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

 

[Athiudisc]

That was a "generic" you, not you "personally", as I don't know your personal beliefs in these matters.

I hoped so, but the "please don't take this as permission to go off topic, ok?" seemed a bit odd in that case. I've misunderstood your replies to me before, though, so...

I realize you know this, but to spell it out even more clearly for others, a distinction has to be made between them believing all non-Muslims will go to hell versus advocating for sending them there at the hands of violent Muslims.

Their religion suggests both.

Heck, when I was a little girl I was told all Protestants would go to hell. So would Catholics who didn't attend Mass. Since my father hadn't been to Mass in twenty years, I had nightmares of him in hell for a good long while. Thankfully, by the time I hit high school I was taught by more enlightened and educated nuns that people never exposed to our beliefs couldn't be judged for that, that there was, in fact, a "Baptism by deeds", virtual Baptism, and at least a bow to the idea that a merciful God would make exceptions for "good" people, and "Heresy of heresies", some even wondered whether, given that behavior could stem from psychological and physical trauma suffered by people whom we deem "evil", perhaps no one was in hell at all.

This is, as evidenced by your hope that Islamic theology moves in such a direction, currently unknown to them.

Even then, as you seem to understand, our laws here in the U.S. require a concrete act in furtherance of a conspiracy for certain things to be actionable. Without it, there's really nothing to be done, which is a position with which I agree.

We seem to completely agree on this issue.

 

[Athiudisc]

Indeed. That is against the supreme law of the country. Its inciting hate and also violence to people who do not share these values.

Fair enough. I respect your consistency.

Same with Torah and Bible. If they can do it, why not Radical and extremist Muslims?

I'm less familiar with Rabbinical Judaism than modern Christianity, but Islam seems to have no mechanism through which it can be said, "this edict from our god no longer applies." The infallibility of the Qu'ran is a cornerstone of Islam.

Would you be happy to allow it in the US if this happens there in a freedom exercise as you are proposing?

Your question is unclear to me. Allow what? Special privileges for "hate speech" just for Muslims? No. That's why I prefer the American system in this case. People are free to believe and say what they like save for immediate incitements to criminal violence. I don't have to like what they say or agree with what they say; I'm simply required to shrug and ignore them, at worst, until they venture into the realm of criminality.

 

[Athiudisc]

Saul Alinsky was one of Hillary Clinton´s greatly admired heroes and mentors, a luciferian.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jVbbOdXaRE


Ben Carson about Hillary Clinton
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...en-carson-said-about-hillary-clinton-saul-al/

"Now, one of the things that I have learned about Hillary Clinton is that one of her heroes, her mentors was Saul Alinsky. And her senior thesis was about Saul Alinsky. This was someone she greatly admired and let me tell you something about Saul Alinsky," Carson said.
"He wrote a book called Rules for Radicals. It acknowledges Lucifer, the original radical who gained his own kingdom. Now think about that. This is our nation where our founding document, the Declaration of Independence talks about certain inalienable rights that come from our creator, a nation where our Pledge of Allegiance says we are ‘One nation under God.’ This is a nation where every coin in our pockets and every bill in our wallet says, ‘In God We Trust.’ So are we willing to elect someone as president who has as their role model somebody who acknowledges Lucifer? Think about that."

I feel compelled to point out that the figure of Lucifer means entirely different things to Luciferians and Christians. To the former, he's a symbol of freedom and liberty, far more in line with the founders Carson references, than the Christian version of Lucifer as evil personified.

To Luciferians, the Hebrew deity Carson's referring to is an evil tyrant.

 

[DejaVu]

DONALD TRUMP conspiracy president 2017 exposed by the ANONYMOUS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRuPnYXXFqg


Anonymous - Message to the Citizens of America
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJYnf7fiLh0

 

[Angela]

Islam, unlike Christianity, has no central authority to my understanding, so it's a bit chaotic.

I didn't mean to imply that there are no Muslim scholars or believers whose theology has indeed moved on from the caricature presented by these ISIS monsters.

Certainly, there are Muslim scholars who do not share what some of the posters here are so certain is believed across the board.

I don't know who this man is, or what kind of affiliations this group has, but the things expounded upon here are very much in sync with what I remember of some varieties of Islam.

http://www.islamicity.org/3769/does-the-quran-or-muhammad-promote-violence/

You might also want to take a look at these:

http://www.acommonword.com/the-acw-document/
http://www.acommonword.com/recommended-reading-lists-by-muslim-and-christian-scholars/

We've veered quite a bit off topic, however.

 

[Athiudisc]

Certainly, there are Muslim scholars who do not share what some of the posters here are so certain is believed across the board.

There are no Muslims that believe the Qu'ran to be false, as far as I know.

You might also want to take a look at these:

Couldn't watch the video at present, so I read the first link. They rather proved my point, or one of them, at least.

An epistle of love between two sects of worshipers of a Semitic god means nothing to one who has no care for Semitic gods. It certainly has no bearing on commandments to kill those who will not kneel to Semitic gods.

As for loving thy neighbor, something else addressed, I note a lot of it is couched in terms of one's "brother," but taken with Islam's actual precepts, I cannot help but think this refers to their ummah of "the Book," at best. Unfortunately, this does nothing to negate their ill-will towards me. It doesn't even address it, honestly.

We've veered quite a bit off topic, however.

Fair enough. Back to American presidential discussion?

 

[Athiudisc]

Suiting actions to words (getting back to presidential discussion), yet echoing the previous subject, CNN"s top story right now is

A rhetorical face-slap

wherein they relate a Muslim holding up a copy of the American Constitution at the DNC, supposedly in refutation of Trump.

But Trump's suggestion that immigration from Muslim countries be curtailed is not, in any sense, unconstitutional.

Are CNN stupid, or do they simply believe everyone else is?

 

[Angela]

There are no Muslims that believe the Qu'ran to be false, as far as I know.



Couldn't watch the video at present, so I read the first link. They rather proved my point, or one of them, at least.

An epistle of love between two sects of worshipers of a Semitic god means nothing to one who has no care for Semitic gods. It certainly has no bearing on commandments to kill those who will not kneel to Semitic gods.

As for loving thy neighbor, something else addressed, I note a lot of it is couched in terms of one's "brother," but taken with Islam's actual precepts, I cannot help but think this refers to their ummah of "the Book," at best. Unfortunately, this does nothing to negate their ill-will towards me. It doesn't even address it, honestly.



Fair enough. Back to American presidential discussion?

No Christian believes the "Bible" to be "false" either. A real Christian believes it is the inspired word of God. That doesn't mean all "real" Christians all take all of the precepts even in the New Testament literally. Do you think they really believe, "If thine eye offend thee, pluck it out?" I think you should read the "islamicity" document(s) more carefully. One shouldn't criticize a religion without reading the work of actual believers, and by that I don't mean some petty thug from Brussels who was "converted" to the ISIS form, or even the Wahabi form of Islam, two weeks before he carried out an attack. That isn't the only interpretation or "theological current" in Islam. The writer on the islamicity site approaches Koranic interpretation in the same complex and erudite fashion as do modern theologically trained Christian commentators. Having read the entire letter, I can say that it is extremely similar to formulations in Christianity. Perhaps if more westerners had any training in the theology of their own ancestral religion, they would understand the various strains in Islam better.

Yes, I don't think this is the thread for an extended discussion of this topic.

As to CNN, it's been a long time since any news channels made much of a pretense of being objective, but the conduct of those anchors during the DNC absolutely takes the cake. No, of course, there is nothing in the constitution that prohibits the institution of some common sense restrictions on immigration.

Yes, I think they're that stupid.

 

[Athiudisc]

[scrubbed for pointlessness]

 

[Garrick]

Islam, unlike Christianity, has no central authority to my understanding, so it's a bit chaotic.

I didn't mean to imply that there are no Muslim scholars or believers whose theology has indeed moved on from the caricature presented by these ISIS monsters.

Certainly, there are Muslim scholars who do not share what some of the posters here are so certain is believed across the board.

I don't know who this man is, or what kind of affiliations this group has, but the things expounded upon here are very much in sync with what I remember of some varieties of Islam.

http://www.islamicity.org/3769/does-the-quran-or-muhammad-promote-violence/

You might also want to take a look at these:

http://www.acommonword.com/the-acw-document/
http://www.acommonword.com/recommended-reading-lists-by-muslim-and-christian-scholars/

We've veered quite a bit off topic, however.

Every Muslim must accept that there is not god but Allah and Muhammed is messenger of Allah.

It means that every Muslim must accept Quran as it consists unaltered and direct words of Allah.

It is first pillar of Islam, it is essence for every man or woman who convert in Islam, otherwise he or she cannot be Muslim.

...
Yes you right, Islam has no central authority (although of course Ulema has high importance and respect among Muslims).

It is because for every Muslim Quran is inviolable, immutable and cannot be challenged.

Hadhits are words, acts and confirmations of Prophet Muhammed.

Quran and Hadhit are primary sources for Muslims and they guide their life.

Who knows this it is more clearly why in Islam central authority is not needed unlike some other religions.

...
Only explanation, otherwise it can be further elaborate on some other threads.

 

[DejaVu]

Clinton Cash official documentary movie
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LYRUOd_QoM


Writer of "Clinton Cash" Peter Schweizer on concerns of potential corruption by the Clintons tells how he wrote the book on Hillary and Bill.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkfE10g8xbc

 

[Dinarid]

I hate political correctness.
I think EU government is underperforming and making wrong decisions.
I think Obama foreign policy failed.
Does it make me a Trump/Putin adept?

That should be rather easy to answer. Do you support Russofascism against Ukraine? Do you believe that every criticism of Russia's imperialist ambitions is part of a Jewish conspiracy?

 

[Minty]

I never heard of that but maybe someone from the states can explain further. What I know that America is an incredibly rich country and if all the rich people gave 20 dollars a month which is peanuts they would bring not only Americans out of poverty but many others around the world. Its not only Americans anyway. I am not sure why you have all this worry for super Rich people and so much disregard for poorer people. America is the richest country on Earth and have the greatest army. Donald Trump is saying he wants to make America Great again> PLEASE can one explain how we can ALL help to make America Greater then what it is? PLEASE can you explain this kind of greed. I am bewildered. What shall ALL the nations of the world do? Give everything to Trump as he is very mad when other countries progress economically. He wants to see people starving in China, He wants to see Mexico bank rupt, so he can tell his loyal supporters. America is great again and every body else is starving under our feet. Wake up. Can I just have a little break please.......................

You will need to find someone on this forum who makes a living as a landlord to vouch for this. My aunt used to rent out townhouses and now she owns a hotel. She has over 10 years of experiences in this career, and you? I told you a lot of my background to try to avoid misunderstanding from you, now can you tell me a something about you? Otherwise every time I say something, you will be saying things like, now we in Europe....blah blah blah.

Oh, as landlord, if you meet nightmare tenants you can go to the court and sue them, then police will come and drag the bad tenants out of your property, but then it is you who have to pay for all those services, and the poor tenants pay nothing.


If you do a bit of research yourself online, you could find something: Here, Have a read of this...
https://www.rentalutions.com/educat...ries-renters-who-pay-late-or-dont-pay-at-all/

Never heard of that either. All I know is that locally when you rent a place you make a legal contract. You give a deposit. If you leave before your contract ends you do not get the deposit back. If you do not pay your rent you are out in the street. Maybe someone from France should explain if what you are saying its true because it sounds like madness. We are not exactly in the kind of war were towns are flattened out through air raids so one needs emergency housing. Desperate type of housing as you mention happend after world war11 when whole towns were flattened and left millions of people dead and many millions more injured mentally and physically.

I am wondering about something. It says that you are Maltese on your profile and that you live in Malta. So why you have a French flag? Can you read French? I can find you articles in french, but I won't have time to translate for you.

Have you lived in France? A lot of French people I know know about this and I know A LOT of French people.

I think if Malasyia was at war you would expect some kind of help from your neighbors. Or maybe not? Never had experienced someone through one thing or another have lost all they had not necessarily their fault? What makes you feel so invincible and can never happen to you?. As long as you are human nobody is. Keep that in mind Lady. You have super cold attitude which I don't like. Anyway I am sorry but your reasoning is like you come from some kind of cast system where you see poor people as animals. I am not brought up in that environment. Enough with your anti poor anti needy rhetoric. I come from an inclusive society we are very proud of. And by the way Australians, Canadians and Americans I met have been the most vociferous and brave for a justice and do not really echo your sentiment. Not only for fellow humans but also animals. At least that is my experience.

I do not hate poor people. If you think so, you don't know me at all. I do not see poor people as animals as you put it. If you say that about Malaysia, like most Europeans you have very little knowledge about Asia. With my over ten years of experiences with the Europeans, I can tell you that most Europeans know a lot of things about their own continent, a lot of things about the US and a lot of things about Africa, but very little or none about Asia. In the EU curriculum, it is not compulsory to study anything about Asia. The amount of ignorance I experience as an Asian person in Europe is worth writing a book.

In Malaysia there are plenty of poor people. Malaysia is NOT a first world country. If you want to to succeed in life you have to work very hard for it.

Now, in France if you have a lot of children, and if you are very poor, you can claim a lot of money from the government. Once again, people abuse the robin hood system, this is one of the reasons why the French socialist system is failing among other things. The government is trying to change it, then people protest everywhere. This country does not just need a reform, they need a revolution. This socialist system is just breeding pesticides. This is one part of France I dislike, even though I love many other things French.

Moreover, the Malaysian passport is one of the best passports in the world. If you do a bit of research you will find that Malaysia is NOT a first world country. Most of the best passports of the world are countries of first worlds.

https://www.passportindex.org/byRank.php

If you compare Malaysia with a lot of countries out there, you will find it is a peaceful country by comparison.


There is also a difference on how poor we are talking about. When the people are extremely poor, there is a high risk they will become criminals.

For example, most spammers are from Nigeria because it is an extremely poor country:
In 2011, the FBI received close to 30,000 reports of advance fee ploys, called "419 scams" after the section of the Nigerian criminal code that outlaws fraud. The agency received over 4,000 complaints of advance fee romance scams in 2012, with victim losses totaling over $55 million.Mar 20, 2014

My British colleagues wanted to drag me to their vacations in India. I told them that there will be harrassments. Now, they are a couple years younger than me, so they took it as a joke and gone to India. I received a complaint message from them recently, saying that the men over there are freaky and scary.

Well, at least they are still in one piece, and unharmed. Worst case scenarios are rape and be killed.

I have done charity work, and still doing one... but the difference is those jobs I did and am doing are done or am doing out of freewill, which is completely different when somebody is stealing from you and harassing you because they think because you are better off than them, you must give to them.

Good luck to them. It does not mean anything. For a country to live well it has to has good trade and reasonably day to day commodities and food. Just by exchanging workers its going to prove anything economic wise. We see it when it happens. But nothing changes so far, which could have.

I think you are very old fashioned, so that is my impression so far... Everything has to be done in your way. If somebody doesn't agree with you, you try to make it look like I am some kind of pathetic person, that I should adopt your method because you think you are better than me. Newsflash, there will be people who don't agree with you. C'est la vie!

Britain never wanted to be part of the EU in the first place. It is very different from the way they do things. Its a very state orientated thing. They prefer freedom of the individual - restriction on the freedom of the individual, political correctness, when you limit speech about what you can say, [barring] something that might offend someone; they are very much orientated to a wide business. They want to look at the rest of the world. They want be trading with the Far East, China. The EU does not suit them; they are tired of this dying economy with a collapsing Euro. Countries like Greece, Spain, and Portugal are going bust. They do not want to be part of this.

The British people have spoken. It is like when somebody want out of the marriage, you try to drag them against their will to stay in the marriage and you are very sarcastic about it, just because you don't agree with their decision. We will see, what will happen. I think in the short term, no doubt there will be disadvantages for the British but in the long term the tables can turn.

 

[LeBrok]

We need hate speech LeBrok there is no freedom here.....why no hate preachers? Hate speech = Freedom.....cool stuff

It gives me an excellent Idea.
Could you answer, fellow posters, if you are OK with Imams in Mosques in Europe and US being free to preach Islamist hate speeches and encourage killing unbelievers?
Is it ok with you Athiudisc for Imams to have unlimited freedom of speech, and you Bicicleur for Imams being politically incorrect?

 

[Angela]

Well, I wasn't specifically addressed, but I'll answer anyway.

I'm in favor of monitoring the speeches that are made in mosques, and if they are indeed advocating overthrow of the government, or the killing of unbelievers, and they are not citizens, they should be deported.

If they are citizens, in the U.S., at least, we are bound by the Constitution, The Bill of Rights and judicial precedent, so for conspiracy charges to stick the speech must be accompanied by an act; however, all that's needed is one act, and it needn't be very major.

For those who have fallen in love with the Democrat Party and Hillary Clinton, they are against both of these things, and are, if we go by the convention, essentially for open borders, and no, I don't think it's because of some, "we're the land of immigrants" malarkey; it's because they plan on helping them get citizenship and enrolling them in the Democrat Party as soon as possible.

 

[oreo_cookie]

For those who have fallen in love with the Democrat Party and Hillary Clinton, they are against both of these things, and are, if we go by the convention, essentially for open borders, and no, I don't think it's because of some, "we're the land of immigrants" malarkey; it's because they plan on helping them get citizenship and enrolling them in the Democrat Party as soon as possible.

That is exactly what it is: it's pandering. No one actually thinks allowing illegal immigration is a good thing, or allowing refugees for whom proper background checks cannot be performed to enter in unchecked numbers... well, except a lot of liberal millennials of my generation.

 

[Maleth]

I am wondering about something. It says that you are Maltese on your profile and that you live in Malta. So why you have a French flag? Can you read French? I can find you articles in french, but I won't have time to translate for you.

I never had a French flag next to my profile. Since the post is very off topic in relation to title I answered here.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28844-The-Dark-Side-of-France/page2

scroll down

 

[Maleth]

Your question is unclear to me. Allow what? Special privileges for "hate speech" just for Muslims? No. That's why I prefer the American system in this case. People are free to believe and say what they like save for immediate incitements to criminal violence. I don't have to like what they say or agree with what they say; I'm simply required to shrug and ignore them, at worst, until they venture into the realm of criminality.

Thanks thats what I meant. So what they say and do as per to what I posted will be considered acceptable (say) in the middle of time square in New York? Im not referring to you in particular, but I find it extremely difficult to understand how Hate speech is not connected to fueling (automatically) to venture into violence and criminality. I think this is what it all boils down to. If someone angers someone out of improper and non civil debate protected by law to express themselves in a very obvious hateful attitude inciting violence (such as beheading or lashing or chopping off hands in the name of Religion, or some politician make sound good and proper to punch someone in the face and seen dragged out on a stretcher just to stay on topic). Do we need multi million Euro (or dollars if you prefer ) to conclude some study that Hate speech does not fuel a trend of Violence and crime, therefore it needs to be allowed and protected by law? It will take me a very long time to believe that Hate speech and violence and Crime are not interrelated.