« prev   random   next »

3
0

Hate crime "ok"-ed: "The attack on a synagogue is an act of criticism"

By mostly reader follow mostly reader   2017 Jan 14, 9:26am 1,666 views   7 comments   watch   nsfw   quote   share    


http://www.juedische-allgemeine.de/article/view/id/27477

In Germany, arson now is almost a legitimate act, it appears. As long as the target is a synagogue. Arsonist then is not an arsonist, but a critic of Israeli policy who went too far with criticism.
Europe is finished, stick a fork in it.

1   Strategist   ignore (2)   2017 Jan 14, 9:48am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

mostly reader says

In Germany, arson now is almost a legitimate act, it appears. As long as the target is a synagogue. Arsonist then is not an arsonist, but a critic of Israeli policy who went too far with criticism.

Europe is finished, stick a fork in it.

Everyone is surrendering to Islam. We are all finished.

2   NoCoupForYou   ignore (3)   2017 Jan 14, 10:13am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

3 Palestinians threw molotovs at it. While drunk, because Jihadis are allowed to imbibe while waging war on the Kuffar.

Today Temples, tomorrow the Cathedrals.

3   APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostakovitch   ignore (60)   2017 Jan 14, 10:29am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Given the history of arson, even threatening its application should be a crime.

McGee/Kowalski/Chan/Rabinowitz/Gorman, I'll punch you in the nose! is one thing. Arson is iconic violence meant to inspire the madness of mob violence.

4   HEY YOU   ignore (10)   2017 Jan 14, 10:55am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Atheists should destroy all "fiction" religions & their trapping
before the whole world is brainwashed.

5   mostly reader   ignore (0)   2017 Jan 14, 1:01pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

HEY YOU says

Atheists should destroy all "fiction" religions & their trapping
before the whole world is brainwashed.

Appeal to "destruction of all religions" is not a reasonable answer to the fact that most religion-based violence today comes from a specific group. Rather, it's a diversion from a concrete pain point to something generic and impractical. If trivialized - I just don't see why destruction of Buddhism should take precedence over better vetting of those coming from known radical areas.

But this case drew my attention not because of display of violence. Display of violence - there is nothing new there. It was the super hypocrisy of the ruling. True hate crime wasn't viewed as such in the court of law because the victims are of "politically incorrect" affiliation (jews), and the perpetrators are of the "politically correct" affiliation (palestinians). "Fcuked up" doesn't even start to describe it.

6   Strategist   ignore (2)   2017 Jan 14, 2:56pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

mostly reader says

Appeal to "destruction of all religions" is not a reasonable answer to the fact that most religion-based violence today comes from a specific group.

Here is a hint as to what that specific group is.....Fucking Islam.

7   lostand confused   ignore (0)   2017 Jan 14, 3:43pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Germans-using the Jihadis to finish what they started.


about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions