• ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    12 hours ago

    https://lemmy.world/post/50117911

    Just so it’s clear: I don’t support IDF. I’m saying that a country has the same right to apply their rules as an airline. I’m still perfectly aware that this will get downvoted to hell because lemmings don’t like it when leftist speech is suppressed but love when right-wing speech is and will not admit it.

      • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        10 hours ago

        So you think delaying a plane is the only rule around speech that exists in the world? No other laws exist?

        Or are you only able to compare exactly identical situations?

        Doesn’t really matter. I know everyone will now be playing “find 100 differences” with those two situations bringing up one irrelevant thing after another while completely missing the only thing that matters: in both cases it was legal to suppress speech, lemmy reacted differently because in one case they agree with the speaker and in the other case they don’t.

        • PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          11 hours ago

          No, I think bob vylen or whatever his name is keeps his speech to his shows and the media and doesn’t subject unwilling people to his opinions when they have no escape.

          You don’t get to stand on your soapbox on other peoples dime, if you’re holding up a plane taking off it doesn’t matter if you’re doing it by speaking your mind or taking a shit in the isle. The airline has the right to kick you the fuck off

        • rezifon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 hours ago

          So you think delaying a plane is the only rule around speech that exists in the world? No other laws exist?

          What an asinine response. Of course the other commenter does not think this. Nobody does.

    • oortjunk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Hmm. You should probably go back to lisp. Don’t take this personally but you’re objectively, measurably wretched at the hot takes gig.

    • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Matthew 6:5 New International Version

      “And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others."

        • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Yet she multiplied her promiscuity, remembering the days of her youth, when she had prostituted herself in the land of Egypt and lusted after their lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of stallions. So you revisited the indecency of your youth, when the Egyptians caressed your bosom and pressed your young breasts.…

        • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 hours ago

          OK I’LL SPELL IT OUT IN SMALL WORDS SO MAYBE YOU CAN COMPREHEND:

          YOU DO NOT HAVE THE FREEDOM TO BOTHER PEOPLE ON THE PLANE.

          simple enough? fucks sake. how would you feel if someone started a call to pray for Mohammed? would you sit there quietly while they did their thing?

          no you fucking wouldn’t

          • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 hours ago

            Dude, chilax. I’m not saying this lady should be allowed to preach on a plane. I’m saying the airline has the right to remove her and Germany has the right not to let in people that chant “Death, death to the IDF,” Lemmy reacted differently to both post.

            Now you will start looking for differences between those situations but you will fail to prove that one was legal and the other wasn’t. The only difference will be that you like one speaker but not the other.

            • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              8 hours ago

              Dude, get fucked.

              . I’m saying that a country has the same right to apply their rules as an airline.

              you’re confusing unrelated things in order to make a futile point because <reasons>

              these aren’t related in any way shape or form. it’s completely ‘legal’ and logical to shut this shrieking hag down on the air plane, and it’s still hypocritical of germany to censor speech critical of israel. these things aren’t connected in any way.

              you’re just full of garbage

              • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 hours ago

                it’s completely ‘legal’ and logical to shut this shrieking hag down on the air plane, and it’s still hypocritical of germany to censor speech critical of israel.

                You see? You can’t write a single sentence without confusing ‘legal’ with ‘hypocritical’. I said pretty much just that in the other thread and got downvoted because a lot of people get very emotional about this for some reason. Just like you. Why is that?