Comments by "L.W. Paradis" (@l.w.paradis2108) on "Cyberbullies Elon And JK Rowling Named In Olympic Boxer's Lawsuit" video.

  1. Congrats on fomenting more hysteria over free speech here. Nice job. We already know who stands to suffer most: pro-Palestinian protestors, even the reasonable, peaceful ones. We hear an interview from her, but not the actual words used against her or against the Olympic Committee that allowed her to box. So we don't know from this video what was said by these defendants. Harassment, bullying, and defamation are about actual words. With this mentality, our First Amendment won't survive.
    2
  2. @Dr.Vas0  Who thinks that? Elon is odious. Oh wait, this is an English language audience. Okay, now I know why you think stuff like that. 😂
    2
  3. No, it shouldn't. It's the IOC's mistake. Their responsibility.
    2
  4. How do you know? This video does not tell us what they said. That's what a court will look at. Or how did you think it should work?
    1
  5.  @resourcedragon  If they said anything actionable, I certainly wish her luck in her suit. The fact that this video makes light of American free speech rights is what has me concerned. When someone is accused of defamation, IIEM, etc., people should ask to hear the actual words.
    1
  6. ​ @MZBS639 Did they attack the athlete or the Olympic Committee that authorized the match? Attacks on the Olympic Committee should be free speech everywhere. We hear an interview from her, but not the actual words used against her or against allowing her to box by Rowling or Musk. So we don't know from this video what was said by these defendants. Doesn't that bother you? With this mentality, our First Amendment won't survive. It's already being attacked by partisans of Netanyahu, and university presidents are having to resign over it. It didn't take long for the actual left to be denied freedom of speech.
    1
  7.  @peterschaeffer  So, this is on the IOC. The athlete didn't choose to have this disorder.
    1
  8. @peterschaeffer  Well, I disagree. And in any event, a person with a medical condition should not be coddled, or given special privileges over others, agreed -- but nor should they suffer any abuse, ever. If you cannot be kind, then leave them alone. She applied like everyone else. She did not rule on her own application. There is nothing more to add to that.
    1
  9. @peterschaeffer  Would you stop? And how could that possibly justify harassing Khelif? On the contrary, any medical condition is a reason to take care not to say anything unkind, especially to a young athlete, but really not to anyone. The IOC should not allow biological males to compete with females. The general rule. Applying it is THEIR job. There ya go.
    1
  10. @peterschaeffer  I've made it clear that I disagree. Eligibility is determined not by the athlete but strictly by the IOC and its divisions. When do highly paid authorities have to work? By the way? Blocked.
    1
  11. That's not how laws work. Cyberbullying (and worse) the peaceful pro-Palestinian students: a lot of people consider that to be just dandy.
    1
  12. @Alex-gh8iu  Who said what to whom? What was said to her? Did you hear it here? Well, then what are we discussing? Harassment and defamation are certainly actionable, and are about the actual words a person was subjected to. They are not about feelings alone.
    1
  13.  @Alex-gh8iu  Actually, I'll give you a better answer: if that's the price of freedom to protest Israel's actions in Gaza, then yes. I would grin and bear it.
    1
  14.  @Alex-gh8iu  In any case, if there is some legitimate issue about anyone's eligibility, only the IOC merits scrutiny, not the athlete. She didn't declare herself eligible. She's just living her life. But the real issue in the US is free speech. Keep your eye on the ball.
    1
  15. What did they say exactly? Show me in this video what they said. Defamation, harassment, and so forth are about actual words.
    1
  16. ​@TheGrandy123 Did this video present the actual words used by Rowling et al? How do you know they were bullying her, and not criticizing the Olympics for its decision to allow her to box with non-intersex women? The words used matter. That's what charges of harassment, bullying, and defamation ride on. The words.
    1
  17. ​ @Keithdogyouknowitson Did they attack the athlete or the Olympic Committee that authorized the match? Attacks on the Olympic Committee should be free speech everywhere. We hear an interview from her, but not the actual words used against her or against allowing her to box by Rowling or Musk. So we don't know from this video what was said by these defendants. With this mentality, our First Amendment won't survive.
    1
  18. @peterschaeffer  Be that as it may -- then whole issue is the IOC. It's on them, not her.
    1
  19.  @peterschaeffer  She didn't rule on her own application.
    1
  20. This isn't the left. The US has no left, and now it's losing its civil libertarians and classical liberals. Did everyone already forget that this logic was used against peaceful and reasonable students rallying in support of Gaza? But that was just a few weeks ago . . . SMH
    1
  21.  @Alex-gh8iu  You're an _____.
    1
  22. Source?
    1
  23.  @8114梦见  Understood. Thanks for trying.
    1
  24.  @8114梦见  They won't even let me thank you. 😂😂😂
    1
  25.  @8114梦见  My thanks are in the shade portion.
    1
  26. Thank you ​ @8114梦见 
    1
  27. ​ @8114梦见 Let's see if a simple ty is permitted.
    1
  28. With what? Didn't you notice that this video didn't bother to tell you the exact words? That's what harassment and defamation are about: words.
    1
  29. This logic was already used against students for Palestine -- even the peaceful ones, basically saying what Bernie Sanders and Amy Goodman are saying.
    1
  30. Did they attack the athlete or the Olympic Committee that authorized the match? Attacks on the Olympic Committee should be free speech everywhere. We hear an interview from her, but not the actual words used against her or against allowing her to box by Rowling or Musk. So we don't know from this video what was said by these defendants. Did you miss that part? With this mentality, our First Amendment won't survive.
    1
  31. @sandrols7  Nowhere did I say that defamation should not be available, if it applies. Of course it should. Do you know anything about defamation law in the US? Do you know why "opinions" are not actionable, in the US?
    1
  32.  @sandrols7  A discussion about first principles harms no one.
    1
  33.  @sandrols7  Fundamental rights don't matter? . . . How do you think university protests against arming the war on Gaza are shut down? They make some people feel unsafe. The rights you give up are ALWAYS your own.
    1
  34. @sandrols7  A discussion about first principles harms no one --- what part of that is elusive?
    1
  35.  @melanie1825  Where did you hear that she gave birth?
    1
  36. @peterschaeffer  Well, in that case, it lies at the doorstep of the IOC, not the athlete. She didn't declare herself eligible, she applied to compete like everyone else. It was up to them to rule properly. But to be clear -- I agree with all your points.
    1
  37.  @resourcedragon  I know. But this video is American and influences Americans.
    1
  38. ​ @templarw20 How many pro-Palestinian groups would be bankrupt?
    1
  39. Good question. This video approved of going after these defendants for their words without telling us their words. We just learned that the words were mean and hurtful. Criticizing the IOC should generally be protected as free speech everywhere.
    1
  40. What did they actually say? Are they attacking her, or the IOC? Criticism of the IOC should be free speech everywhere. The actual words they used matter, but this video didn't tell us. It just showed her reaction. You know where lack of free speech protections goes, right? It was already used against students for Palestine -- even the peaceful ones, basically saying what Bernie Sanders and Amy Goodman are saying. That's what happens when you support criminalizing opinions.
    1
  41. ​ @MP-db9sw If she was defamed or subjected to intentional infliction of emotional distress, then yes. She has a case. Musk already got away with defamation once. He is in court ALL the time. He's a dubious business man -- ask the original founders of Tesla, ask the State of California. But she has the burden of proof. You should care about free speech no matter the issue.
    1
  42.  @MP-db9sw  That's not a problem. Actual defamation is not First Amendment protected. Being wrong, however, usually is. Some people think the pro-Palestinian protestors are "wrong."
    1
  43. @MP-db9sw  The remedy for false speech is true speech. I recommend Nadine Strossen's books on free speech. She is only slightly more pro free speech than I am, and the book is so well written that it allowed me to pinpoint my areas of disagreement and sharpen my arguments. I can't say more, it won't post. So much for free speech as a cultural value.
    1
  44.  @MP-db9sw  I can't develop it because cents or ship. SMH
    1
  45. @MP-db9sw  What did I say about not being able to develop this idea? Hm? I tried several times. What is your position on that? I wasn't even able to name Supreme Court cases. As for your last line, no it isn't.
    1
  46. He's in court constantly.
    1