OT: Rittenhouse shot \"three black men\" - apparently!...

[Phil Allison]

bitrex = RAVING LUNATIC wrote:
===========================

** What a fucking, pig ignorant idea.

In any defamation case the WHOLE issue revolves around \" defamatory imputations\".
What the words implied about the defamed party in the minds of others.

Look it up - fuckhead.



With respect to claims that can be shown to be true, or false.

** That is a problem for the defamer - to prove their claim is true.
Truth is a defense in defamation law.

There\'s
no way to show whether the claim \"he is a white supremacist\" is true or
false.

** Fucking stupid garbage.

What makes you think a court would just assume he isn\'t one?

** They have to, cos they cannot assume otherwise.

They assume nothing,

** Just what I posted.

When filing a defamation action, the applicant must list the imputations that are false.
Then the respondent needs to show otherwise.

** But is is a crime to be a murderer - as Kyle was called many times in the MSM.

Also breaking the law of \"sub judice contempt\".

Then let them him sue them over that and good luck,

** Criminal offence.

You have no mind .

Opinions are protected speech here.

** ROTFL - not when it is a serious defamation of a person.

But the statement \"he is a white supremacist\" is an opinion.

** A defamatory one.

It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on,

** Utter garbage - it has several clear and very negative meanings.

definitely not \"the clear
imputation was that Kyle deserved to go to jail for life.\" Huh?

** It was a clear jury instruction by implication.

Vote to acquit and you are letting a vile, white racist and murderer go free.

Some as saying EXACTLY that RIGHT NOW !!!
===================================


....... Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

bitrex = RAVING LUNATIC wrote:
===========================

** What a fucking, pig ignorant idea.

In any defamation case the WHOLE issue revolves around \" defamatory imputations\".
What the words implied about the defamed party in the minds of others.

Look it up - fuckhead.



With respect to claims that can be shown to be true, or false.

** That is a problem for the defamer - to prove their claim is true.
Truth is a defense in defamation law.

There\'s
no way to show whether the claim \"he is a white supremacist\" is true or
false.

** Fucking stupid garbage.

What makes you think a court would just assume he isn\'t one?

** They have to, cos they cannot assume otherwise.

They assume nothing,

** Just what I posted.

When filing a defamation action, the applicant must list the imputations that are false.
Then the respondent needs to show otherwise.

** But is is a crime to be a murderer - as Kyle was called many times in the MSM.

Also breaking the law of \"sub judice contempt\".

Then let them him sue them over that and good luck,

** Criminal offence.

You have no mind .

Opinions are protected speech here.

** ROTFL - not when it is a serious defamation of a person.

But the statement \"he is a white supremacist\" is an opinion.

** A defamatory one.

It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on,

** Utter garbage - it has several clear and very negative meanings.

definitely not \"the clear
imputation was that Kyle deserved to go to jail for life.\" Huh?

** It was a clear jury instruction by implication.

Vote to acquit and you are letting a vile, white racist and murderer go free.

Some as saying EXACTLY that RIGHT NOW !!!
===================================


....... Phil

 

[bitrex]

On 11/20/2021 7:56 PM, Phil Allison wrote:

bitrex = RAVING LUNATIC wrote:
===========================

** What a fucking, pig ignorant idea.

In any defamation case the WHOLE issue revolves around \" defamatory imputations\".
What the words implied about the defamed party in the minds of others.

Look it up - fuckhead.



With respect to claims that can be shown to be true, or false.

** That is a problem for the defamer - to prove their claim is true.
Truth is a defense in defamation law.

There\'s
no way to show whether the claim \"he is a white supremacist\" is true or
false.

** Fucking stupid garbage.

What makes you think a court would just assume he isn\'t one?

** They have to, cos they cannot assume otherwise.

They assume nothing,

** Just what I posted.

When filing a defamation action, the applicant must list the imputations that are false.
Then the respondent needs to show otherwise.




** But is is a crime to be a murderer - as Kyle was called many times in the MSM.

Also breaking the law of \"sub judice contempt\".

Then let them him sue them over that and good luck,

** Criminal offence.

You have no mind .


Opinions are protected speech here.

** ROTFL - not when it is a serious defamation of a person.

But the statement \"he is a white supremacist\" is an opinion.

** A defamatory one.

It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on,

** Utter garbage - it has several clear and very negative meanings.

So do the terms \"communist\" and \"cultural Marxist\", but it doesn\'t
matter. I\'m not surprised you can\'t see the corollary, though.

definitely not \"the clear
imputation was that Kyle deserved to go to jail for life.\" Huh?

** It was a clear jury instruction by implication.

Vote to acquit and you are letting a vile, white racist and murderer go free.

Some as saying EXACTLY that RIGHT NOW !!!
===================================

Some say, life here, began out there...far across the Universe...

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hrd767Xzfk>

...... Phil

 

[bitrex]

On 11/20/2021 7:56 PM, Phil Allison wrote:

bitrex = RAVING LUNATIC wrote:
===========================

** What a fucking, pig ignorant idea.

In any defamation case the WHOLE issue revolves around \" defamatory imputations\".
What the words implied about the defamed party in the minds of others.

Look it up - fuckhead.



With respect to claims that can be shown to be true, or false.

** That is a problem for the defamer - to prove their claim is true.
Truth is a defense in defamation law.

There\'s
no way to show whether the claim \"he is a white supremacist\" is true or
false.

** Fucking stupid garbage.

What makes you think a court would just assume he isn\'t one?

** They have to, cos they cannot assume otherwise.

They assume nothing,

** Just what I posted.

When filing a defamation action, the applicant must list the imputations that are false.
Then the respondent needs to show otherwise.




** But is is a crime to be a murderer - as Kyle was called many times in the MSM.

Also breaking the law of \"sub judice contempt\".

Then let them him sue them over that and good luck,

** Criminal offence.

You have no mind .


Opinions are protected speech here.

** ROTFL - not when it is a serious defamation of a person.

But the statement \"he is a white supremacist\" is an opinion.

** A defamatory one.

It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on,

** Utter garbage - it has several clear and very negative meanings.

So do the terms \"communist\" and \"cultural Marxist\", but it doesn\'t
matter. I\'m not surprised you can\'t see the corollary, though.

definitely not \"the clear
imputation was that Kyle deserved to go to jail for life.\" Huh?

** It was a clear jury instruction by implication.

Vote to acquit and you are letting a vile, white racist and murderer go free.

Some as saying EXACTLY that RIGHT NOW !!!
===================================

Some say, life here, began out there...far across the Universe...

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hrd767Xzfk>

...... Phil

 

[Simon S Aysdie]

On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 3:20:20 AM UTC-8, Cursitor Doom wrote:

The usual impartial, truthful reporting from the usual, impartial
sources: the MSM:

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2021/11/19/fact-check-false-uk-publication-claims-kyle-rittenhouse-shot-three-black-men/

It is rather appalling.

Just to arbitrarily pick one of the infinitely repeated disinformation tidbits, there is the lie that it was \"not his community\" and he had no business being there (were the rioter\'s quals checked?).

\"[H]is father, grandmother, aunt, uncle, cousins and best friend live in Kenosha. He had a job as a lifeguard in Kenosha and worked a shift on Aug. 25 before helping clean graffiti left by rioters at a local school.\" -- <https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2021/11/20/some-of-the-worst-lies-peddled-about-kyle-rittenhouse-n2599392>

There\'s the \"mom drove him\" and \"crossed state lines with a weapon\" lies too. There\'s the white supremacist smear. It goes on and on. It is an ever-flowing sewer main.

 

[Phil Allison]

bitrex = RAVING LUNATIC wrote:
=======================

Opinions are protected speech here.

** ROTFL - not when it is a serious defamation of a person.

But the statement \"he is a white supremacist\" is an opinion.

** A defamatory one.

It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on,

** Utter garbage - it has several clear and very negative meanings.
So do the terms \"communist\" and \"cultural Marxist\", but it doesn\'t
matter. I\'m not surprised you can\'t see the corollary, though.
definitely not \"the clear
imputation was that Kyle deserved to go to jail for life.\" Huh?

** It was a clear jury instruction by implication.

Vote to acquit and you are letting a vile, white racist and murderer go free.

Some as saying EXACTLY that RIGHT NOW !!!
===================================
Some say, life here, began out there...far across the Universe...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hrd767Xzfk

** LOL - I win - yet again.

 

[Phil Allison]

bitrex = RAVING LUNATIC wrote:
=======================

Opinions are protected speech here.

** ROTFL - not when it is a serious defamation of a person.

But the statement \"he is a white supremacist\" is an opinion.

** A defamatory one.

It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on,

** Utter garbage - it has several clear and very negative meanings.
So do the terms \"communist\" and \"cultural Marxist\", but it doesn\'t
matter. I\'m not surprised you can\'t see the corollary, though.
definitely not \"the clear
imputation was that Kyle deserved to go to jail for life.\" Huh?

** It was a clear jury instruction by implication.

Vote to acquit and you are letting a vile, white racist and murderer go free.

Some as saying EXACTLY that RIGHT NOW !!!
===================================
Some say, life here, began out there...far across the Universe...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hrd767Xzfk

** LOL - I win - yet again.

 

[Pamela]

On 23:48 20 Nov 2021, bitrex said:

On 11/20/2021 6:41 PM, Pamela wrote:
On 23:02 20 Nov 2021, bitrex said:
On 11/20/2021 4:33 PM, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 15:07:31 -0500, bitrex <user@example.net
wrote:

14 hours a day of opinion pieces is a lot cheaper than
maintaining foreign news bureaus, too.

The BBC manages to somehow do both! It\'s amazing what you can do
with limitless cash extorted from the public under the threat of
imprisonment, it seems.


The real crime with American media is they almost universally
expect you to pay to watch/read it, instead of the reverse.

I wanted to watch the Red Sox lose to the Astros and it\'s never
been harder to just watch a game than it is now, it\'s all
paywalled to hell and gone with a few captive providers and who
would ever pay them for a subscription.

Fox was carrying it online and they give you a free 1 hour trial
so I watched it for an hour and then just repasted the link to the
free trial in a Chrome incognito window thinking \"no way this is
gonna work\" and it worked fine, what a bunch of dumb-dumbs.

You could probably just write a script to automate that and get
infinite sports TV until they figure it out.

I haven\'t used them for a while but you might still be able to
stream Fox TV with these links. Also other U.S. channels too.

http://watchnewslive.tv.fox

http://livenewsnow.com/featured/fox-news.html

Looks like those are for Fox News (ick), but in the US they have a
number of other channels that carry live sports etc. that you can
only watch online if you have like a cable TV provider login, or
subscribe to one of those online service like Hulu, Fubo, Sling,
YouTubeTV, and probably pay some additional monthly fee, I haven\'t
checked.

The sites offer other live U.S. channels too. I used Fox in the links
because that what you mentioned.

 

[Simon S Aysdie]

On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 4:56:26 PM UTC-8, palli...@gmail.com wrote:

bitrex = RAVING LUNATIC wrote:

Then let them him sue them over that and good luck,
** Criminal offence.

You have no mind .
Opinions are protected speech here.

** ROTFL - not when it is a serious defamation of a person.

But the statement \"he is a white supremacist\" is an opinion.
** A defamatory one.
It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on,
** Utter garbage - it has several clear and very negative meanings.

I have no idea if a defamation suit could be successful. In the US it mostly hinges on whether Rittenhouse has become a public figure, as the barrier becomes much more difficult for public figures.

But mostly, I wanted to point out the utter duplicity and incoherence regarding the term \"white supremacist\" that we have just witnessed. You\'re totally right that it is \"defamatory and has ... very negative meaning.\" They would not be smearing people with the label if it didn\'t.

Out one side of Democrat mouths is \"white supremacy is a huge thing in the US ... IT MUST BE FOUGHT! Call in the FBI and DOJ!\"

Then, we see like we do here, when pressed \"It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on.\" So, it is a horrible thing that we must sick the Federal cops on, and also not much of anything at all. All at the same time. It\'s amazing. lol

I have seen this nonsense elsewhere with high frequency. It isn\'t unique to Bitter. He\'s just getting from his leaders.

 

[Simon S Aysdie]

On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 4:56:26 PM UTC-8, palli...@gmail.com wrote:

bitrex = RAVING LUNATIC wrote:

Then let them him sue them over that and good luck,
** Criminal offence.

You have no mind .
Opinions are protected speech here.

** ROTFL - not when it is a serious defamation of a person.

But the statement \"he is a white supremacist\" is an opinion.
** A defamatory one.
It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on,
** Utter garbage - it has several clear and very negative meanings.

I have no idea if a defamation suit could be successful. In the US it mostly hinges on whether Rittenhouse has become a public figure, as the barrier becomes much more difficult for public figures.

But mostly, I wanted to point out the utter duplicity and incoherence regarding the term \"white supremacist\" that we have just witnessed. You\'re totally right that it is \"defamatory and has ... very negative meaning.\" They would not be smearing people with the label if it didn\'t.

Out one side of Democrat mouths is \"white supremacy is a huge thing in the US ... IT MUST BE FOUGHT! Call in the FBI and DOJ!\"

Then, we see like we do here, when pressed \"It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on.\" So, it is a horrible thing that we must sick the Federal cops on, and also not much of anything at all. All at the same time. It\'s amazing. lol

I have seen this nonsense elsewhere with high frequency. It isn\'t unique to Bitter. He\'s just getting from his leaders.

 

[Simon S Aysdie]

On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 4:56:26 PM UTC-8, palli...@gmail.com wrote:

bitrex = RAVING LUNATIC wrote:

Then let them him sue them over that and good luck,
** Criminal offence.

You have no mind .
Opinions are protected speech here.

** ROTFL - not when it is a serious defamation of a person.

But the statement \"he is a white supremacist\" is an opinion.
** A defamatory one.
It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on,
** Utter garbage - it has several clear and very negative meanings.

I have no idea if a defamation suit could be successful. In the US it mostly hinges on whether Rittenhouse has become a public figure, as the barrier becomes much more difficult for public figures.

But mostly, I wanted to point out the utter duplicity and incoherence regarding the term \"white supremacist\" that we have just witnessed. You\'re totally right that it is \"defamatory and has ... very negative meaning.\" They would not be smearing people with the label if it didn\'t.

Out one side of Democrat mouths is \"white supremacy is a huge thing in the US ... IT MUST BE FOUGHT! Call in the FBI and DOJ!\"

Then, we see like we do here, when pressed \"It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on.\" So, it is a horrible thing that we must sick the Federal cops on, and also not much of anything at all. All at the same time. It\'s amazing. lol

I have seen this nonsense elsewhere with high frequency. It isn\'t unique to Bitter. He\'s just getting from his leaders.

 

[Phil Allison]

bitrex = RAVING LUNATIC wrote:
=======================

Opinions are protected speech here.

** ROTFL - not when it is a serious defamation of a person.

But the statement \"he is a white supremacist\" is an opinion.

** A defamatory one.

It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on,

** Utter garbage - it has several clear and very negative meanings.
So do the terms \"communist\" and \"cultural Marxist\", but it doesn\'t
matter. I\'m not surprised you can\'t see the corollary, though.
definitely not \"the clear
imputation was that Kyle deserved to go to jail for life.\" Huh?

** It was a clear jury instruction by implication.

Vote to acquit and you are letting a vile, white racist and murderer go free.

Some as saying EXACTLY that RIGHT NOW !!!
===================================
Some say, life here, began out there...far across the Universe...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hrd767Xzfk

** LOL - I win - yet again.

 

[bitrex]

On 11/20/2021 8:27 PM, Simon S Aysdie wrote:

On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 4:56:26 PM UTC-8, palli...@gmail.com wrote:
bitrex = RAVING LUNATIC wrote:

Then let them him sue them over that and good luck,
** Criminal offence.

You have no mind .
Opinions are protected speech here.

** ROTFL - not when it is a serious defamation of a person.

But the statement \"he is a white supremacist\" is an opinion.
** A defamatory one.
It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on,
** Utter garbage - it has several clear and very negative meanings.

I have no idea if a defamation suit could be successful. In the US it mostly hinges on whether Rittenhouse has become a public figure, as the barrier becomes much more difficult for public figures.

But mostly, I wanted to point out the utter duplicity and incoherence regarding the term \"white supremacist\" that we have just witnessed. You\'re totally right that it is \"defamatory and has ... very negative meaning.\" They would not be smearing people with the label if it didn\'t.

Out one side of Democrat mouths is \"white supremacy is a huge thing in the US ... IT MUST BE FOUGHT! Call in the FBI and DOJ!\"

Then, we see like we do here, when pressed \"It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on.\" So, it is a horrible thing that we must sick the Federal cops on, and also not much of anything at all. All at the same time. It\'s amazing. lol

You\'ve confused words for the actual thing. The words \"white
supremacist\" are just words. Whether anyone in particular is one or
isn\'t because someone says they are, isn\'t a true/false decision that
can be determined by a court. A court can\'t determine if anyone is
actually \"communist\" or a \"cultural Marxist\", either, the terms aren\'t
well-defined.

> I have seen this nonsense elsewhere with high frequency. It isn\'t unique to Bitter. He\'s just getting from his leaders.

More like long legal precedent in the US court system, not that \"true
patriots\" here have much use for that stuff when it doesn\'t give them
what they want, either.

That is to say they are a bunch of fucking frauds.

 

[bitrex]

On 11/20/2021 8:27 PM, Simon S Aysdie wrote:

On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 4:56:26 PM UTC-8, palli...@gmail.com wrote:
bitrex = RAVING LUNATIC wrote:

Then let them him sue them over that and good luck,
** Criminal offence.

You have no mind .
Opinions are protected speech here.

** ROTFL - not when it is a serious defamation of a person.

But the statement \"he is a white supremacist\" is an opinion.
** A defamatory one.
It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on,
** Utter garbage - it has several clear and very negative meanings.

I have no idea if a defamation suit could be successful. In the US it mostly hinges on whether Rittenhouse has become a public figure, as the barrier becomes much more difficult for public figures.

But mostly, I wanted to point out the utter duplicity and incoherence regarding the term \"white supremacist\" that we have just witnessed. You\'re totally right that it is \"defamatory and has ... very negative meaning.\" They would not be smearing people with the label if it didn\'t.

Out one side of Democrat mouths is \"white supremacy is a huge thing in the US ... IT MUST BE FOUGHT! Call in the FBI and DOJ!\"

Then, we see like we do here, when pressed \"It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on.\" So, it is a horrible thing that we must sick the Federal cops on, and also not much of anything at all. All at the same time. It\'s amazing. lol

You\'ve confused words for the actual thing. The words \"white
supremacist\" are just words. Whether anyone in particular is one or
isn\'t because someone says they are, isn\'t a true/false decision that
can be determined by a court. A court can\'t determine if anyone is
actually \"communist\" or a \"cultural Marxist\", either, the terms aren\'t
well-defined.

> I have seen this nonsense elsewhere with high frequency. It isn\'t unique to Bitter. He\'s just getting from his leaders.

More like long legal precedent in the US court system, not that \"true
patriots\" here have much use for that stuff when it doesn\'t give them
what they want, either.

That is to say they are a bunch of fucking frauds.

 

[bitrex]

On 11/20/2021 8:27 PM, Simon S Aysdie wrote:

On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 4:56:26 PM UTC-8, palli...@gmail.com wrote:
bitrex = RAVING LUNATIC wrote:

Then let them him sue them over that and good luck,
** Criminal offence.

You have no mind .
Opinions are protected speech here.

** ROTFL - not when it is a serious defamation of a person.

But the statement \"he is a white supremacist\" is an opinion.
** A defamatory one.
It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on,
** Utter garbage - it has several clear and very negative meanings.

I have no idea if a defamation suit could be successful. In the US it mostly hinges on whether Rittenhouse has become a public figure, as the barrier becomes much more difficult for public figures.

But mostly, I wanted to point out the utter duplicity and incoherence regarding the term \"white supremacist\" that we have just witnessed. You\'re totally right that it is \"defamatory and has ... very negative meaning.\" They would not be smearing people with the label if it didn\'t.

Out one side of Democrat mouths is \"white supremacy is a huge thing in the US ... IT MUST BE FOUGHT! Call in the FBI and DOJ!\"

Then, we see like we do here, when pressed \"It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on.\" So, it is a horrible thing that we must sick the Federal cops on, and also not much of anything at all. All at the same time. It\'s amazing. lol

You\'ve confused words for the actual thing. The words \"white
supremacist\" are just words. Whether anyone in particular is one or
isn\'t because someone says they are, isn\'t a true/false decision that
can be determined by a court. A court can\'t determine if anyone is
actually \"communist\" or a \"cultural Marxist\", either, the terms aren\'t
well-defined.

> I have seen this nonsense elsewhere with high frequency. It isn\'t unique to Bitter. He\'s just getting from his leaders.

More like long legal precedent in the US court system, not that \"true
patriots\" here have much use for that stuff when it doesn\'t give them
what they want, either.

That is to say they are a bunch of fucking frauds.

 

[Phil Allison]

On Sunday, November 21, 2021 at 12:27:06 PM UTC+11, Simon S Aysdie wrote:

On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 4:56:26 PM UTC-8, palli...@gmail.com wrote:
bitrex = RAVING LUNATIC wrote:

Then let them him sue them over that and good luck,
** Criminal offence.

You have no mind .
Opinions are protected speech here.

** ROTFL - not when it is a serious defamation of a person.

But the statement \"he is a white supremacist\" is an opinion.
** A defamatory one.
It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on,
** Utter garbage - it has several clear and very negative meanings.

I have no idea if a defamation suit could be successful.

** So what should you do?

> In the US it mostly hinges on whether Rittenhouse has become a public figure,

** Bullshit, public figures are MORE likely to suffer from defamation and Kyle is NOT one.

But mostly, I wanted to point out the utter duplicity and incoherence regarding the term
\"white supremacist\" that we have just witnessed. You\'re totally right that it is \"defamatory and has
... very negative meaning.\" They would not be smearing people with the label if it didn\'t.

** Correct.

It a real cheap shot that is hard for the victim to disprove.
But defamation law does not require them to do that.


...... Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

On Sunday, November 21, 2021 at 12:27:06 PM UTC+11, Simon S Aysdie wrote:

On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 4:56:26 PM UTC-8, palli...@gmail.com wrote:
bitrex = RAVING LUNATIC wrote:

Then let them him sue them over that and good luck,
** Criminal offence.

You have no mind .
Opinions are protected speech here.

** ROTFL - not when it is a serious defamation of a person.

But the statement \"he is a white supremacist\" is an opinion.
** A defamatory one.
It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on,
** Utter garbage - it has several clear and very negative meanings.

I have no idea if a defamation suit could be successful.

** So what should you do?

> In the US it mostly hinges on whether Rittenhouse has become a public figure,

** Bullshit, public figures are MORE likely to suffer from defamation and Kyle is NOT one.

But mostly, I wanted to point out the utter duplicity and incoherence regarding the term
\"white supremacist\" that we have just witnessed. You\'re totally right that it is \"defamatory and has
... very negative meaning.\" They would not be smearing people with the label if it didn\'t.

** Correct.

It a real cheap shot that is hard for the victim to disprove.
But defamation law does not require them to do that.


...... Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

On Sunday, November 21, 2021 at 12:27:06 PM UTC+11, Simon S Aysdie wrote:

On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 4:56:26 PM UTC-8, palli...@gmail.com wrote:
bitrex = RAVING LUNATIC wrote:

Then let them him sue them over that and good luck,
** Criminal offence.

You have no mind .
Opinions are protected speech here.

** ROTFL - not when it is a serious defamation of a person.

But the statement \"he is a white supremacist\" is an opinion.
** A defamatory one.
It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on,
** Utter garbage - it has several clear and very negative meanings.

I have no idea if a defamation suit could be successful.

** So what should you do?

> In the US it mostly hinges on whether Rittenhouse has become a public figure,

** Bullshit, public figures are MORE likely to suffer from defamation and Kyle is NOT one.

But mostly, I wanted to point out the utter duplicity and incoherence regarding the term
\"white supremacist\" that we have just witnessed. You\'re totally right that it is \"defamatory and has
... very negative meaning.\" They would not be smearing people with the label if it didn\'t.

** Correct.

It a real cheap shot that is hard for the victim to disprove.
But defamation law does not require them to do that.


...... Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

On Sunday, November 21, 2021 at 12:27:06 PM UTC+11, Simon S Aysdie wrote:

On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 4:56:26 PM UTC-8, palli...@gmail.com wrote:
bitrex = RAVING LUNATIC wrote:

Then let them him sue them over that and good luck,
** Criminal offence.

You have no mind .
Opinions are protected speech here.

** ROTFL - not when it is a serious defamation of a person.

But the statement \"he is a white supremacist\" is an opinion.
** A defamatory one.
It imputes nothing further anyone can agree on,
** Utter garbage - it has several clear and very negative meanings.

I have no idea if a defamation suit could be successful.

** So what should you do?

> In the US it mostly hinges on whether Rittenhouse has become a public figure,

** Bullshit, public figures are MORE likely to suffer from defamation and Kyle is NOT one.

But mostly, I wanted to point out the utter duplicity and incoherence regarding the term
\"white supremacist\" that we have just witnessed. You\'re totally right that it is \"defamatory and has
... very negative meaning.\" They would not be smearing people with the label if it didn\'t.

** Correct.

It a real cheap shot that is hard for the victim to disprove.
But defamation law does not require them to do that.


...... Phil

 

[bitrex]

On 11/20/2021 8:20 PM, Pamela wrote:

On 23:48 20 Nov 2021, bitrex said:
On 11/20/2021 6:41 PM, Pamela wrote:
On 23:02 20 Nov 2021, bitrex said:
On 11/20/2021 4:33 PM, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 15:07:31 -0500, bitrex <user@example.net
wrote:

14 hours a day of opinion pieces is a lot cheaper than
maintaining foreign news bureaus, too.

The BBC manages to somehow do both! It\'s amazing what you can do
with limitless cash extorted from the public under the threat of
imprisonment, it seems.


The real crime with American media is they almost universally
expect you to pay to watch/read it, instead of the reverse.

I wanted to watch the Red Sox lose to the Astros and it\'s never
been harder to just watch a game than it is now, it\'s all
paywalled to hell and gone with a few captive providers and who
would ever pay them for a subscription.

Fox was carrying it online and they give you a free 1 hour trial
so I watched it for an hour and then just repasted the link to the
free trial in a Chrome incognito window thinking \"no way this is
gonna work\" and it worked fine, what a bunch of dumb-dumbs.

You could probably just write a script to automate that and get
infinite sports TV until they figure it out.

I haven\'t used them for a while but you might still be able to
stream Fox TV with these links. Also other U.S. channels too.

http://watchnewslive.tv.fox

http://livenewsnow.com/featured/fox-news.html

Looks like those are for Fox News (ick), but in the US they have a
number of other channels that carry live sports etc. that you can
only watch online if you have like a cable TV provider login, or
subscribe to one of those online service like Hulu, Fubo, Sling,
YouTubeTV, and probably pay some additional monthly fee, I haven\'t
checked.

The sites offer other live U.S. channels too. I used Fox in the links
because that what you mentioned.

Oh I see, I\'ll check that out. Is the first link correct? it doesn\'t
seem to go anywhere here \"DNS_PROBE_FINISHED_NXDOMAIN\"