Trump's threat is an actual 1st Amendment violation - the Government punishing protestors who are exercising their free speech.
Someone gave Trump the power to consider them as violent rioters.
Trump's threat is an actual 1st Amendment violation - the Government punishing protestors who are exercising their free speech.
Him being on Fox News two nights in a row is pushing him into the spotlight?
Dude makes media appearances on major networks every week.
Someone gave Trump the power to consider them as violent rioters.
https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/827216946999476225
Milo going to be on Tucker Carlson Tonight at 9ET live in studio. 2 nights in a row getting to speak on Fox News with Tucker. Looks like the riots have just pushed Milo further into the spotlight.
Right? lol..Folks really trying to act like this fuck is a nobody. Just don't look, people!
Oh ok apologiesSpecifically nothing of value is lost when hate speech is outlawed. I'm not trying to steer you into a dogpile. Just hate speech shouldn't be tolerated, before "but who decides what's hate speech?" Let's start with everything Breibart stands for.
Doesn't mean they are forced to give him a platformUC Berkley isnt a private institution.
My country has a thing called racial injury, 1 to 3 years.But that's the point I was making, though. Ultimately that's where it matters. Not on a discussion forum. But in the voting boothes and Capital Hill.
Even then, I wonder how we would classify hate speech in the legislation. That's why I hope we steal back the legislative branch in 2018, because shit like that wouldn't happen under our current regime.
Him being on Fox News two nights in a row is pushing him into the spotlight?
Dude makes media appearances on major networks every week.
The rioting and violence that got the event cancelled is not going to be sustainable. Purposely putting students saftey in danger is a reprehensible way to protest his speech.And so the students will be there again. And so on and so forth.
It does.Doesn't mean they are forced to give him a platform
https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/827216946999476225
Milo going to be on Tucker Carlson Tonight at 9ET live in studio. 2 nights in a row getting to speak on Fox News with Tucker. Looks like the riots have just pushed Milo further into the spotlight.
As someone who just learned who Milo is a couple of days ago, I had no idea he had appeared in the major media networks before. Tucker draws a good crowd though so he's going to get another night of wide coverage.
The rioting and violence that got the event cancelled is not going to be sustainable. Purposely putting students saftey in danger is a reprehensible way to protest his speech.
Right? lol..Folks really trying to act like this fuck is a nobody. Just don't look, people!
Them who? The entire university? So, you think he's right to threaten that way? Hmm..surprising..
He already has wide coverage.
What? I am saying that the people who felt inclined to attack people, loot and destroy property gave trump the ability to consider them beyond protesters and into the margin of violent rioters...
So, I'm wondering (because no way I'm watching this), does Tucker just nod along as Milo goes full white supremacist and/or spouts misogyny?
They can't legally.Maybe the university should take a positive step then and tell Milo to hold his speaking engagement elsewhere.
No no, much like we were talking about earlier, he will use the recent violence to play for sympathy and greatly tone down his rhetoric for Prime Time. He can sound intelligent and sympathetic when he wants too.
No no, much like we were talking about earlier, he will use the recent violence to play for sympathy and greatly tone down his rhetoric for Prime Time. He can sound intelligent and sympathetic when he wants too.
Oh no, Nephtes gonna have to explain Milo again to his Fox News loving mom out of his busy Overwatch schedule. Thanks, liberals.https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/827216946999476225
Milo going to be on Tucker Carlson Tonight at 9ET live in studio. 2 nights in a row getting to speak on Fox News with Tucker. Looks like the riots have just pushed Milo further into the spotlight.
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Trump-update-Protest-at-UC-Berkeley-prompts-10902945.php
outside the Martin Luther King Jr. Student Union, where the event was set to take place
They can't legally.
This is why free speech laws are stupid. Someone has to determine what is and what is not hate speech right? Who is the current President of the United States?
He'll probably pull the "I'm gay" (though he isn't really) card to get sympathy like always as well.
And that is utterly fucking irrelevant to him threatening to cut federal funding for the entire school.
Any restrictions on public or limited public forums have to be viewpoint neutral.Oh for fucks sake, a publicly funded university is allowed to have restrictions on venue usage by student groups.
You think if it were a peaceful protest he would of said the same thing? In my opinion the violence is what he can use to leverage this issue. I don't agree with it and still think it is absurd, but to say he is punishing protesters, when he is clearly referring to rioters, is a little disingenuous.
Any restrictions on public or limited public forums have to be viewpoint neutral.
Yes. He was already talking about criminalizing protesting a week ago. We had a thread on it.
Hes not?
Hateful rhetoric isn't a free speech exeption. The simple fact of the matter is the courts would force thier hand regardless.Yes, in this case you can ban hateful rhetoric. Very simple.
Although I'm guessing your next response will be something along the lines of "well what qualifies hateful rhetoric? And why should [blank] qualify as hate speech? Everyone deserves a platform."
No, everyone does not deserve a platform. Especially when that platform is shaky at best and can be torn down easily when it's used to provoke people and then act the fucking victim.
You think if it were a peaceful protest he would of said the same thing? In my opinion the violence is what he can use to leverage this issue. I don't agree with it and still think it is absurd, but to say he is punishing protesters, when he is clearly referring to rioters, is a little disingenuous.
Yes. He was already talking about criminalizing protesting a week ago. We had a thread on it.
It's like people are just ignoring these things..
Hateful rhetoric isn't a free speech exeption. The simple fact of the matter is the courts would force thier hand regardless.
No, he's bisexual, maybe, to be honest I don't even really believe he's that.
I think he's just using his non-normative sexuality to play off sympathy for himself.
Violence against these idiots will only incite and breed more followers.
The Left/Liberals are characterized as being compassionate and considerate but in the media are protrayed as the ones committing acts of violence during protests. Trump supporters will only grow stronger.
As someone who just learned who Milo is a couple of days ago, I had no idea he had appeared in the major media networks before. Tucker draws a good crowd though so he's going to get another night of wide coverage.
You think if it were a peaceful protest he would of said the same thing? In my opinion the violence is what he can use to leverage this issue. I don't agree with it and still think it is absurd, but to say he is punishing protesters, when he is clearly referring to rioters, is a little disingenuous.
Think outside of the box here for a minute.Hateful rhetoric isn't a free speech exeption. The simple fact of the matter is the courts would force thier hand regardless.
I have no problem with the vast majority who where peacefully protesting Milo. And nothing I have said has excused Milo for his actions. I'm simply stating the fact that he had the right under the first amendment to speak at the university if invited.Know what? Why the fuck are you shifting so much blame to the protesters and away from the provocateur? The whole reason that he was being protested and violence happened is because of the fucked up things that come out of the mouth of this motherfucker.
That's not how the 1st Amendment works. Your constitution guarantees the right to say whatever you want without fear of repercussion BY THE GOVERMENT, it doesn't mean individuals or private institutions have to give you the opportunity to express it.
I have no problem with the vast majority who where peacefully protesting Milo. And nothing I have said has excused Milo for his actions. I'm simply stating the fact that he had the right under the first amendment to speak at the university if invited.
Fighting words and threats are limited exeptions that would allow the authorities to charge him if he ran afoul of actual legal statutes with criminal intent, but it doesn't allow the university to exersise prior restraint to stop his speech.Think outside of the box here for a minute.
"In the United States, the only two types of hate speech laws likely to survive are those that are likely to elicit an imminent fight and those that are truly threatening," he said. Cuomo said.
http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...hris-cuomo-first-amendment-doesnt-cover-hate/
Do Milo's views threaten sexual, racial, and gender minority students? Yes.
Did this hate speech incite violence? Yes.
Illegal and nasty.
Fighting words and threats are limited exeptions that would allow the authorities to charge him if he ran afoul of actual legal statutes with criminal intent, but it doesn't allow the university to exersise prior restraint to stop his speech.
Violence against these idiots will only incite and breed more followers.
The Left/Liberals are characterized as being compassionate and considerate but in the media are protrayed as the ones committing acts of violence during protests. Trump supporters will only grow stronger.
Trump has little to no control over who enforces local criminal statutes.The authorities are racist and right wing comprador pigs.
Trump is the authority.
Chancellor said:UC Berkeley condemns in the strongest possible terms the actions of individuals who invaded the campus, infiltrated a crowd of peaceful students and used violent tactics to close down the event. We deeply regret that the violence unleashed by this group undermined the First Amendment rights of the speaker as well as those who came to lawfully assemble and protest his presence.
The university went to extraordinary lengths to facilitate planning and preparation for this event, working in close concert with the Berkeley College Republicans. Dozens of police officers were brought in from UC campuses across the state. Numerous crowd-control measures were put in place. But, we could not plan for the unprecedented. Last night the Berkeley campus was invaded by more than 100 armed individuals clad all in black who utilized paramilitary tactics to engage in violent, destructive behavior designed to shut the event down. At that point the University of California Police Department concluded that the speaker had to be evacuated from campus for his own safety, thereby bringing the event to an end.
For the campus police, the primary objective is always the safety and well-being of our students and the public. That is what informs their strategies and tactics. In that context we are relieved that, as of now, there have been no reports of serious injuries.
We are proud of our history and legacy as the home of the Free Speech Movement. While we have made clear our belief that the inflaming rhetoric and provocations of Mr. Yiannopoulos were in marked opposition to the basic values of the university, we respected his right to come to campus and speak once he was invited to do so by a legitimate student group. The violence last night was an attack on the fundamental values of the university, which stands for and helps to maintain and nurture open inquiry and an inclusive civil society, the bedrock of a genuinely democratic nation. We are now, and will remain in the future, completely committed to free speech as essential to our educational mission and a vital component of our identity at UC Berkeley.
Trump has little to no control over who enforces local criminal statutes.
Great response from the Chancellor in my opinion. I don't see how either side can disagree with this.
http://news.berkeley.edu/2017/02/02/campus-condemns-violence-defends-free-speech/