You're welcome ... though I thought you were turning it into a running nob gag with the distinguished member jizzing reply ... there's more where that came from - Count Wankula for example, staying on topic with this anti-Semitic troll who Tommeh et al are defending along with similar stunt pullers. Such brave denizens of free speech.
Also defended by Ricky Gervais.
And in a way by Rowan Atkinson in 2012.
Is this his house? Number Nein? Third on the Reich?
https://www.avforums.com/attachments/upload_2018-3-21_21-1-16-png.995360/
Meanwhile,
Rotherham abuse inquiry ‘needs 100 more officers’
I have to disagree with this.
The chap CLEARLY in his video stated he was teaching the dog the most horrible thing he could think of to annoy his girlfriend who thought the dog was the ultimate in cuteness.
He did not advocate, nor encourage actual anti-semitism, it is a joke and humor juxtaposing something cute with something horrible ..... it may that people find it in very poor taste, not funny or even extremely offensive, but it is not in of itself a hate crime because it is not displaying any actual hostility, aggression or prejudice.
However, I also don't like the fact that the far right and alt right have jumped on this case and added it to their cause as evidence of the oppression of free speech since most of the cases they talk about do involve prejudice and/or hostility.
It's much like the difference between Al Murray's Pub Landlord character or Alf Garnet in To Death do us part and the likes of Bernard Manning.
The pub landlord and Alf Garnet say and do racists and/or prejudiced things, but the real joke is that we laugh at them for their stupidity not with them in agreement of their prejudice like with Bernard Manning.
While this chap isn't remotely on a level of comedy, talent or whit with the likes of Warren Mitchel, he is still fundamentally on that side of the line ... where there comedy or joke is aimed at the ridiculousness, stupidity and vileness of fascism and in this case specifically the nazis, rather than directed at Jewish people or their other victims.
Back to the original topic, it was about something else:
"According to a statement from the Zurich district court, the 45-year-old defendant accused an animal rights activist, Erwin Kessler, of racism and antisemitism"
The likes came later.
Looks like clickbait from the Guardian.
It ought not to be a crime, for the reasons that TB just gave.
Yes, because the forum has rules. Rules and crimes aren't the same.
Has anyone an opinion about Mr Worsfield? His case is truly dreadful.
In this particular case in my opinion.
However, that doesn't mean actual hate speech, racism etc should not be a crime.
My argument is based upon whether or not this specific case meets the criteria for a hate crime or not, rather than the merits or validity of the law and hate crimes in and of itself.
OK, I didn't expect us to agree, but on this one specific point we do.
Yes it was truly dreadful.
Nothing else to say really. Happened 6 years ago, expect he's moved on from that, as nothing else has been mentioned since August 2012 - could have been compensated and signed a NDA. Still appears to be a martial arts instructor according to his LinkedIn profile.
I hadn't realised it was so long ago.
BTW You were right about the double meaning.