Russo-Ukrainian War - 2022 Edition - Part3

Status
Not open for further replies.
DreamKing

DreamKing

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 23, 2009
Messages
14,483
Gary Waterworth said:
Russia = Freedom of expresion .. ROFLMFAO
If anything the narative you are spewing has nothing of freedom of speech in it
Click to expand...

I am not saying russia, I am saying "any person".

any person has the right for "freedom of speech".

we are not living in russia, correct?
 
M

MiW

Executive Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
9,313
Solarion said:
No. The color of the curtain is that little ISO color code sticker attached to the packaging wheb you buy it. Candles don't change that. Your perspective on deciding what the color is does not change. ISO standards do not conform to whatever you decide.

Just ask the Putin fans or even Putin himself. They too see the facts as being whatever they decide them to be, filtered through their yellow candle light.
Click to expand...

1659349403793.png
 
DreamKing

DreamKing

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 23, 2009
Messages
14,483
Gary Waterworth said:
Freedom of speech has limitations, depending on your countries laws

Im not in Russia. Not so sure about you and a few others..
Click to expand...

freedom of speech has no limitation.

you want to put limitation on freedom of speech because you want to control other people what they can say / can't say.

who wants to control other people? dictator.
 
vaakseun

vaakseun

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
1,977
Solarion said:
I don't even. What is that? O__o
Click to expand...

MiW said:
We used to get that ... quartz UV light? Sun replacement?
Click to expand...
That's an old photo from National Geographic. Think it was taken in Murmansk or some other northern Russian town.

It's a UV lamp to stimulate vitamin D production so the kids don't get rickets. Very little solar radiation over there.
 
Cosmik Debris

Cosmik Debris

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 25, 2021
Messages
35,118
vaakseun said:
I remember when Capt. Wynand du Toit got captured. I thought that was it. The cat's out of the bag now.

But he managed to hold together under interrogation and told his interrogators that they were dropped off by a Japanese fishing or research vessel. The Russian advisors swallowed that hook, line and sinker, because it was the Russians who came up with that crackpot theory in the first place. And the Russians are of course never wrong.

And then there was also the Soviet spy Cdr. Dieter Gerhardt who was in charge of the Simon's Town naval dockyard...
Click to expand...

Commodore (Equivalent of Brigadier) Gerhardt was OC of the SA Naval Dockyard. He would have had knowledge of any engineering changes to ships and submarines but no knowledge of operations at all as the was not in a need to know position regarding operations. He would have known of sailings and arrivals but would have no idea what the vessel was doing at sea. It must be remembered that ships sailed for training, maintenance trials, exercises and operations.

The big operation to avenge Du Toit was Operation Drostdy, almost exactly a year after Operation Argon. It was an attack on the Port of Namibe (Formerly Mossamedes). Presidential permission had to be given at zero hour when all assets were in place. This rule was instituted after the Du Toit fiasco where a purposely compromised operation was performed without authority from the president by bad actors in the cabinet and SADF.

During Operation Drostdy, which was performed by strike craft, a submarine, special forces and a logistic support vessel, a Cuban ship was sunk, two Russian ships badly damaged and the port oil farm destroyed including power supply to the town. The submarine went back into the harbour after daybreak to photograph the damage using its periscope.

The Mission Commander of that operation was Douw Steyn, the co author of the book detailing the operations.

Once again a Japanese trawler was blamed.
 
M

Major Boredom

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
3,134
DreamKing said:
freedom of speech has no limitation.

you want to put limitation on freedom of speech because you want to control other people what they can say / can't say.

who wants to control other people? dictator.
Click to expand...

Yes there are ....

Even South Africa has limitations.

The right to freedom of expression is a right enshrined in section 16 of the Constitution of South Africa and does not extend to propaganda for war, incitement of imminent violence or advocacy of hatred that is based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion and constitutes incitement to cause harm.

As I have always taught my kids. Make a decision, live with the consequences...

You may feel you have freedom of speech, but I also in turn have my rights.

Furthermore, section 36 of the Constitution makes provision for the limitation of the right to freedom of expression to the extent that the limitation is reasonable and justifiable in an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom

Also it seems like you need some schooling on the term dictator. The term is better placed on your supreme leader that you parrot so much

A dictator is a political leader who possesses absolute power. A dictatorship is a state ruled by one dictator or by a small clique. The word originated as the title of a Roman dictator elected by the Roman Senate to rule the republic in times of emergency (see Roman dictator and justitium).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dicta... political,see Roman dictator and justitium).
 
Last edited:
DreamKing

DreamKing

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 23, 2009
Messages
14,483
Gary Waterworth said:
Yes there are ....

Even South Africa has limitations.

The right to freedom of expression is a right enshrined in section 16 of the Constitution of South Africa and does not extend to propaganda for war, incitement of imminent violence or advocacy of hatred that is based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion and constitutes incitement to cause harm.

As I have always taught my kids. Make a decision, live with the consequences...
Click to expand...

I think I explained this before, I don't want to keep repeating myself.

in short, if you really want to put limitation on speech that is "intentionally spreading untrue information". the definition of untrue information is the speaker doesn't believe that information is true fundamentally.

incitement is for someone has the power to incite, no one will listen to an unknown guy said "alien is coming". but if US president said "alien is coming" you should be scare, correct?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top