J.K. Rowling & Elon Musk Named in Cyberbullying Lawsuit Filed by Imane Khelif

[InTheCloset 21,794]

Eat them Imane. QUEEN

[MOT 3,608]

Khelif has been treated cruelly and disgracefully, and now she's hitting back. Not sure what else these guys expected 

[Helxig 45,366]

Get them!

Two people whose names are already in my Death Note 

[Chromatislaps 34,854]

get those tw*ts

[Guillaume Hamon 6,992]

10 hours ago, faysalaaa said:

Im a Muslim Arab, so I see weird laws in France against Muslims all the time

No french law is "against Muslims". You have laws about religious practices but it's for all religions.

No french law says "a Muslim person must..." while giving a pass to a Christian or a Jewish person over the same thing.

[faysalaaa 5,336]

30 minutes ago, Guillaume Hamon said:

No french law is "against Muslims". You have laws about religious practices but it's for all religions.

No french law says "a Muslim person must..." while giving a pass to a Christian or a Jewish person over the same thing.

That could be true, but their laws against religion in general (which effect muslims) is weird in my opinion. And even though I know it wasnt officially a law, they did ban Muslim wear in beaches for a moment. 

[RudraCNG 15,510]

Get them, queen. They & their acolytes need to pay for all the scheisse they have been spreading.

[CautiousLurker 19,709]

9 hours ago, faysalaaa said:

I dont think its violence to invalidate someone's identity (Even if I think its wrong), and I dont think it should be illegal. But I do think it should be illegal to defame someone which is the case here.

If 'invalidating someone's identity' demonstrably puts the target at risk of losing their livelihood, it's perfectly reasonable to treat those cases the same way you'd treat incitements of violence which are illegal in quite a few countries

In any case JK Rowling didn't 'invalidate someone's identity' - she demonstrably lied about Imane's sex in order to generate backlash against her and jeopardize her career

[faysalaaa 5,336]

1 minute ago, CautiousLurker said:

If 'invalidating someone's identity' demonstrably puts the target at risk of losing their livelihood, it's perfectly reasonable to treat those cases the same way you'd treat incitements of violence which are illegal in quite a few countries

In any case JK Rowling didn't 'invalidate someone's identity' - she demonstrably lied about Imane's sex in order to generate backlash against her and jeopardize her career

Yes I agree thats what JK Rowling did, and by law thats considered defamation, you wont win if you file it under incite of violence.

[Guillaume Hamon 6,992]

1 hour ago, faysalaaa said:

That could be true, but their laws against religion in general (which effect muslims) is weird in my opinion.

Why do you say "that could be true" as if I was inventing it when a quick search show you it's a fact? 

And if you admit the fact it's for all you went from "they have laws against Muslims" to "they have laws for all". That's already a big difference...

1 hour ago, faysalaaa said:

And even though I know it wasnt officially a law, they did ban Muslim wear in beaches for a moment. 

"They"? Like french authorities?

Cause it was a law loophole briefly used in "one per thousand" communities in France before the law emptiness was quickly filled to ban such bans. Yet you made it sounds as a former national thing...

I don't know if you willingly deform things or if it's sincere approximations but there's a gap between the truth and how you portray things.

[faysalaaa 5,336]

38 minutes ago, Guillaume Hamon said:

Why do you say "that could be true" as if I was inventing it when a quick search show you it's a fact? 

And if you admit the fact it's for all you went from "they have laws against Muslims" to "they have laws for all". That's already a big difference...

"They"? Like french authorities?

Cause it was a law loophole briefly used in "one per thousand" communities in France before the law emptiness was quickly filled to ban such bans. Yet you made it sounds as a former national thing...

I don't know if you willingly deform things or if it's sincere approximations but there's a gap between the truth and how you portray things.

Me replying with "that could be true" is me admitting to you that I could be wrong that the law targets Muslims. But for the sake of argument and to not get into the details of the French law, I accepted your argument that its a "law against all", while still having the same opinion that the "law against all" is still weird.

I also made it crystal clear that banning Islamic wear on French beaches was not officially a law, so I dont know why you are saying im lying about it being a law.

I also I cant just google, I need to deep dive into this issue because there is alot of information thats complicated when it comes to the law. 

[misha4ever 2,077]

12 hours ago, faysalaaa said:

I dont think its violence to invalidate someone's identity (Even if I think its wrong), and I dont think it should be illegal. But I do think it should be illegal to defame someone which is the case here.

It is considered verbal abuse in countries where there are laws against violent abuse. just because people insult you and those words don't give you a black eye, doesn't mean it is not violence.

creating a false narrative that can put someone in danger is also violence.

[Jase 13,417]

Joanne needs her comeuppance. Horrid cow.

[Guillaume Hamon 6,992]

2 hours ago, faysalaaa said:

I also made it crystal clear that banning Islamic wear on French beaches was not officially a law, so I dont know why you are saying im lying about it being a law

Your vague phrasing ( "they did" ) made it seems like if it was the way things were done in France while it always was miles away from it.

I wanted to precise things cause folks were liking your comments with these misleading bits.

2 hours ago, faysalaaa said:

also I cant just google, I need to deep dive into this issue because there is alot of information thats complicated when it comes to the law

Fair enough but please,next time, do the deep dive before to make assumptions like the fact it "could" apply to all + vague affirmations cause these can easily create disinformation.

[thefamebitch 834]

Get them, LFG!!!!