andrel <byt### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> On 20-12-2010 20:33, Warp wrote:
> > andrel<byt### [at] gmailcom>  wrote:
> >> Basing an opinion on this case and
> >> extending that to the Dutch laws in general is not something that I
> >> would advise.
> >
> >    I think Condell uses strong rhetoric sometimes to express his views.

> might be, but that sort of implies that his audience knows what he is 
> referring to. And that implies that someone somewhere did his best to 
> misinform the public and succeeded. That worries me a bit. Remember the 
> Dutch are in general allies of the US. How misinformed are they about 
> their enemies? (assuming this person is from the USA)

  He's British.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Condell

> > Similarly to how someone saying "all men are pigs" doesn't necessarily
> > mean that every single male in existence is literally a jerk, but more
> > like a more generalized expression of frustration about a certain
> > phenomenon.

> So what is his frustration with the Dutch criminal courts? I might have 
> missed it by being too close.

  I suppose he sees the whole lawsuit as a travesty against freedom of
speech.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message