Five minutes of hate news
- Thread starter PsihoKekec
- Start date
TheRejectionist
TheRejectionist
-
(ANSA) - ROME, JUN 27 - The judge in a criminal trial in which anti-mafia writer Roberto Saviano is accused of defaming Premier Giorgia Meloni on Tuesday turned down the Gomorra author's request for Meloni to testify to the court.
Saviano, 43, had wanted to question the rightwing PM on her previous migrant statements.
Saviano, the author of the Gomorrah expose, called the leader of the right-wing Brothers of Italy (FdI) party a "bastard" when talking about the issue of migrants on a TV show in December 2020.
He said the same thing about League leader Matteo Salvini, the current deputy premier and infrastructure minister.
Prosecutors opened a criminal investigation after Meloni, who at the time was in the opposition, filed a complaint.
Salvini has presented a request to be a civil plaintiff in the trial.
The writer also faces a separate trial for having called Salvini the "minister of the underworld" on another occasion.
"I think I hold the record for being the journalist and personality who has been most put on trial by this government," he said.
Saviano has been in police protection since the publication of Gomorra in 2006 lifted the lid on the Casalesi clan of Campania's Camorra mafia.
The book was turned into a 2008 film that won second prize at Cannes and was the inspiration for a successful Sky TV series.
The Camorra is Italy's third-biggest criminal organisation behind Calabria's 'Ndrangheta and Sicily's Cosa Nostra.
Press freedom groups have criticised the trial and the fact that defamation is a criminal offence in Italy.
When he called the two officials "bastards", Saviano referred to their previous statements criticising NGO rescue ships as "sea taxis" and "cruise ships".
Leftist gonna left in Italy as well.
Yeah, this story makes me side with the left here. Whoever is okay with prosecuting speech is no friend of mine. Criminal trials for defamation are bullshit.
-
(ANSA) - ROME, JUN 27 - The judge in a criminal trial in which anti-mafia writer Roberto Saviano is accused of defaming Premier Giorgia Meloni on Tuesday turned down the Gomorra author's request for Meloni to testify to the court.
Saviano, 43, had wanted to question the rightwing PM on her previous migrant statements.
Saviano, the author of the Gomorrah expose, called the leader of the right-wing Brothers of Italy (FdI) party a "bastard" when talking about the issue of migrants on a TV show in December 2020.
He said the same thing about League leader Matteo Salvini, the current deputy premier and infrastructure minister.
Prosecutors opened a criminal investigation after Meloni, who at the time was in the opposition, filed a complaint.
Salvini has presented a request to be a civil plaintiff in the trial.
The writer also faces a separate trial for having called Salvini the "minister of the underworld" on another occasion.
"I think I hold the record for being the journalist and personality who has been most put on trial by this government," he said.
Saviano has been in police protection since the publication of Gomorra in 2006 lifted the lid on the Casalesi clan of Campania's Camorra mafia.
The book was turned into a 2008 film that won second prize at Cannes and was the inspiration for a successful Sky TV series.
The Camorra is Italy's third-biggest criminal organisation behind Calabria's 'Ndrangheta and Sicily's Cosa Nostra.
Press freedom groups have criticised the trial and the fact that defamation is a criminal offence in Italy.
When he called the two officials "bastards", Saviano referred to their previous statements criticising NGO rescue ships as "sea taxis" and "cruise ships".
Leftist gonna left in Italy as well.
The issue is consistent rules like that end up with your destruction.
While you might say "I don't like what you have to say, but I'll let you say it", THEY are saying "Thank you for that, we love saying what we want. But if you cross my imaginary line, you're off to prison BIGOT".
Then they should abolish that law for everyone. But as long as the law is on the books, it's on the books for everyone...
Not using it would be a favor, an undeserved and foolish one to give to those who you know will not return it.
No, it doesn't. Reducing the boot on your throat means they have less of a boot to use against you. I want to get rid of the law, so they don't get to use it either. You use a case like this to get them on board for long enough to get rid of the rule. The ACLU did this with Brandenburg, for example. You could also do this politically.
More over, consistency gives you a powerful base to argue from. One can stand on solid principle, or one can try to stand on air.
Trust me, you're preaching to the choir. I like consistent rules and integrity a lot.
But that doesn't matter, now does it? "At least I held my principles" is a fun message on a gravestone, but a somber one.
Mate, then leftists are beating Jesus in miracles because they stand on VACCUM all day.
TheRejectionist
TheRejectionist
It's likely going to end nowhere in the end.
What grinds my gears is that the guy doing the complaining is the type of individual that advocates for this kind of legal procedure but then thinks it is unfair when it happens to him.
If memory serves me right, he actually defamed many (politicians and non-politicians) but never saw anything like this.
King Arts
Well-known member
Why is defamation bullshit as long as they aren’t silly like Japanese laws on it( in japan truth is not a defense to defamation) you should not be able to lie and attack other people’s reputation and honor.
You ignore the value of standing on principle. Leftists are now losing because they stopped standing on principle, and people call them out on their bullshit. On top of that, your behavior is the only thing you are in control of, so it's of primary importance that you yourself act morally, damn what others do. Living a righteous life is its own reward.
A few reasons: first, the person's a public figure, in which case you should be allowed some sort of leeway. Second, it's a criminal trial. Third, it's about using some words colloquially like bastard. (I could be wrong on some of this, but this is what I gleaned from a quick glance).
King Arts
Well-known member
One a little bit of leeway is different than being aloud to say whatever you want. It means being able to start shit whenever you want, it does not mean you are aloud to make up things. Second so what if it's a criminal trial? The whole concept of separating criminal and civil trials is stupid in the first place, I disagree with western liberalism on this. Third the word bastard has a definition. If someone was born while their parents are married they are not a bastard.
So 'a little bit of leeway' is not enough. You should be able to say incorrect things about public figures if they aren't huge lies. Regular people getting basic facts wrong about public figures happens all the time, making a case out of it is stupid.
Second, if it's a criminal trial, that means jail time/probation, not just money. Criminal punishment is far worse than civil punishment, and way too far for defamation. Also, why should the government finance a person resolving their hurt feelings?
The word bastard has multiple definitions, from being an illegitimate offspring to just being an asshole. Just choosing the ones in which the statement is wrong is dumb. Now if he claimed her parents were unmarried, then called her a bastard because of that, that would be fine. Again, I don't know specifics.
The leftists are NOT losing. Get that through your heads, it's over- because it is over. They have won.
They hold the schools, colleges, political offices, judiciary, Dungeons and Dragons, the media, Hollywood, everything big and small. This is because the ones behind it all ("ten ton t-rex") have always understood two things people, even those in the military, always forget:
1) Wars are lost when kings fall, not pawns. You could wipe out ANTIFA with some magical force or phaser fire from the U.S.S. Enterprise tomorrow, it will make absolutely no difference because they are just cannon fodder. The ones behind this all will remain and the cycle will begin again.
2) Wars are not necessarily won by massive troop movements. Remember the story of the 300 Spartans? They held off a massive army for quite some time simply by holding a key position. Well, the leftist elite know that you win wars by holding key nodes, the high ground. By controlling the courts, the media, and the schools a mere several thousand can prevail against millions.
And again, people are brainwashed cowards. They will turn on their own to pander to those who hate them. This is why it is already over and any other argument is just wishful thinking. I cannot even post artwork here for those reasons.
They hold the schools, colleges, political offices, judiciary, Dungeons and Dragons, the media, Hollywood, everything big and small. This is because the ones behind it all ("ten ton t-rex") have always understood two things people, even those in the military, always forget:
1) Wars are lost when kings fall, not pawns. You could wipe out ANTIFA with some magical force or phaser fire from the U.S.S. Enterprise tomorrow, it will make absolutely no difference because they are just cannon fodder. The ones behind this all will remain and the cycle will begin again.
2) Wars are not necessarily won by massive troop movements. Remember the story of the 300 Spartans? They held off a massive army for quite some time simply by holding a key position. Well, the leftist elite know that you win wars by holding key nodes, the high ground. By controlling the courts, the media, and the schools a mere several thousand can prevail against millions.
And again, people are brainwashed cowards. They will turn on their own to pander to those who hate them. This is why it is already over and any other argument is just wishful thinking. I cannot even post artwork here for those reasons.
Yes this is true in the short term.
But nothing lasts forever, and the fact is, these guys are fundamentally both incredibly incompetent and are such assholes that they basically continually piss off large swaths of people and cause continuous defections among the ranks of the powerful to the other side.
This is not something that is unprecidented its happened before and the fact is if your shit at actually running things sooner or later you get replaced by some one else. And you look around and you already see the cracks in the foundations of their power. Is it going to take a long ass time?
Yes.
Is it going to suck?
Yes but these guys are not going to be the eternal elites of the world.
Yeah, but they don't. In fact, their lack of control of the courts just bit them in the ass today, and hurt their control of the schools. Sure, they were winning, but now we can fight and win too.
Quit blackpilling, man.
TheRejectionist
TheRejectionist
I am feeling conflicted about this,
No in Italy a criminal trial doesn't automatically to prison. Many that committed acts that would deserve getting jail time are still waiting trial because the shortest trial can last 5 years unless it is very fucking violent, like a Nigerian drug trafficker who butchered the corpse of her Italian girlfriend after she had overdosed and put the parts in a bag and was caught with his accomplices.
It was one of the reasons Salvini's party won that big that year.
TheRejectionist
TheRejectionist
Personally I think is blackpilling is to a degree justified due to the last 8 years.
I am being a realist. People are too cowardly to really stand up to it all, and the leftists hold all, they control all- look at family courts and the schools. Look at society.
Yes, the past eighteen months have black pilled me once and for all. Grow up and face reality, IT. IS. OVER.
King Arts
Well-known member
One Why should they have that protection? Having lying be protected does not sound good to me. It sounds like a recipe for a bad society that helps bad people and allows them to manipulate people against good people and policies.
Two I know how western common law systems work. I'm saying I disagree with them, hell Sharia law is more libertarian than western common law systems. If someone attacks you that criminal violated YOUR rights, not anyone else's not "societies" so the government and the "people of blah" should not charge someone. The cases should be victim v. criminal. Get rid of criminal v. cvil distinction, put all the punishments from the criminal side into the civil side. That way if you are the victim you have a choice you can forgive the criminal, you can get compensation where he pays you in exchange for forgiveness, or you can get your eye for an eye and get the full punishment.
Three well making people use the correct language seems good so I think of this as social darwinism. Get rid of those that can't live well in society because they are bad actors.
That's not a counter example? I'm not talking about how fast a trial happens. I'm saying that defamation, once convicted/found liable, should never ever result in any punishment other than money and a court order to not repeat the lie.
No, you are a blackpilled person who's gotten so depressed they can only see misery, but lie to yourself and others saying you are a 'realist'.
Government has rarely been what has driven change. Culture is what drives change. And the Right is beginning to win the culture.
Cry harder in your delusions. You are pathetic. It's one thing to be blackpilled, that's understandable. It's another thing to be so selfish that you hate other's happiness and want to make them all blackpilled too. And it's stupider when blackpillers insist that "WAH, we're realists, you are all just delusional." And finally, its defeatist, because that's what they want you to be: a doomed blackpiller. Because a black pilled doomer is no threat to control, because they view ever victory as a waste of time.
Because otherwise politicians with good lawyers will exploit the laws to shut up those they disagree with if they mess up even slightly just once, and the threat of litigation even for true speech will shut up most.
Okay, first Sharia is not more libertarian than Western legal systems. There are no civil liberties in Sharia.
But the rest I do agree with, but doesn't address my complaint: my complaint was that the punishment for defamation (anything non-monetary) would be too harsh.
It is correct language to use bastard to mean asshole though. Words have multiple meanings. And the meaning of a word changes over time. Also, it's a bad idea to have social darwinism over who can be the most autistically correct speaker. Not even counting the moral problems, that's a bad thing to select for. It's saying you want to select for more Karen's and midwits, basically.
Last edited: