Politics & Stuff

[YorkshireBlue 3,264]

5 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

Nazism is a natural enemy.
The big corporation may or may not be an enemy, depending on one's position with repect to it.
But the "antifascists" ?
Antifascists please explain.

Anyway about this trial of mine perhaps the forum can explain some things.
The trial itself, excluding the probable external interventions, was about this term used by the golden dawnies:

preventive defense

To me it means "assault battalion" in relation to Golden Dawn activities and to everyone else among common people.
But to the judge the term was innocent !

Can we dewlve upon it ?

To me "preventive defense" is a strange phrase and never used by the (legal) security forces.
In international law it has a meaning: Somebody sends troops at our border, he does n’t initiate an attack but we strike first. The UN -maybe- justifies our action, so in that sense the term has a legality.
But among private citizens ?
Prevention implies there has been no action from some individual or collection of individuals but we believe there is a danger and we take certain measures.
Defense means action - use of violence.
The two words put together means “attack”, does n’t it ?
So it’s something illegal.

Also if we believe someone is dangerous we have a right to report to the police authority.
Then the police authority has to oblige the other person to keep the peace.
If we neglect this step but take action ourselves it probably means two things:

a) we break the law
b) we don’t know where the danger comes from so we attack random persons - again breaking the law

I ’m not a legal expert and this is my view of “preventive defense”.
Any other ideas ?

 

Are you asking in the most awkward way possible, if attacking and defending are the same thing? 

Edited May 15, 2024 by YorkshireBlue

[Fulham Broadway 17,299]

1 hour ago, YorkshireBlue said:

There is nothing classy about war, there is nothing fair or decent about war, I've been to two different wars, four times and believe me half the shit that goes on you will never see and never know about.

Yes, fuck war.

[cosmicway 1,333]

21 minutes ago, YorkshireBlue said:

Are you asking in the most awkward way possible, if attacking and defending are the same thing? 

It is lexicographic issue.
Attack is attack.
Defense necessitates we 've been attacked - it is legal use of violence.
Preventive defense ?

(anyway, in reality those characters just slaughtered a few innocent people - that's what they have been doing)

Edited May 15, 2024 by cosmicway

[YorkshireBlue 3,264]

1 hour ago, cosmicway said:

It is lexicographic issue.
Attack is attack.
Defense necessitates we 've been attacked - it is legal use of violence.
Preventive defense ?

(anyway, in reality those characters just slaughtered a few innocent people - that's what they have been doing)

Example, if you break in to my house, I see that as an attack on me and my family, I'll kill u if needed. Illegal maybe, justified yes imo 

[cosmicway 1,333]

28 minutes ago, YorkshireBlue said:

Example, if you break in to my house, I see that as an attack on me and my family, I'll kill u if needed. Illegal maybe, justified yes imo 

Exactly my boy.
A hostile action by a specified person or persons preceded your defensive action in your "example".
It's the "preventive" bit and the composite phrase we are talking about.
So what is "preventive defense" ? (*)
I believe the translation from my language to English does not alter the meaning of words in this case and "preventive" means that no other party initiated the violent conflict, only you.
Preventive presence is quite another thing ((e.g. police in a football stadium to deter hooligans - security at airport gates).

(*) it was "let's kill them because they are black" really, but we are into legalese now

In international law it's different.
The term exists and preventive defense is justifiable.
There is a difficulty because war has no laws really and because UN is a talking shop, but nevertheless in the area of international law it is acceptable.
But we are talking about common law.
 

Edited May 15, 2024 by cosmicway

[YorkshireBlue 3,264]

1 hour ago, cosmicway said:

Exactly my boy.
A hostile action by a specified person or persons preceded your defensive action in your "example".
It's the "preventive" bit and the composite phrase we are talking about.
So what is "preventive defense" ? (*)
I believe the translation from my language to English does not alter the meaning of words in this case and "preventive" means that no other party initiated the violent conflict, only you.
Preventive presence is quite another thing ((e.g. police in a football stadium to deter hooligans - security at airport gates).

(*) it was "let's kill them because they are black" really, but we are into legalese now

In international law it's different.
The term exists and preventive defense is justifiable.
There is a difficulty because war has no laws really and because UN is a talking shop, but nevertheless in the area of international law it is acceptable.
But we are talking about common law.
 

War has plenty of laws and so does society in general, doesn't stop them been broken again and again and going unpunished. You will never find perfect in anything and nor should you try looking because you will only ever be disappointed.

Edited May 15, 2024 by YorkshireBlue

[cosmicway 1,333]

6 minutes ago, YorkshireBlue said:

War has plenty of laws and so does society in general, doesn't stop them been broken again and again and going unpunished. You will never find perfect in anything and nor should you try looking because you will only ever be disappointed.

War is unrelated.
Here what I 'm looking for is a lexicographic explanation of "preventive defense", in common law.
I described it as a neonazi-hooligan phrase tantamount to the "assault battalion" - for which the Golden Dawn has already been convicted !
Something else ?
I might accept that the person -a registered Golden Dawn member in fact- who said that did not really mean to incite people to break the peace.
I have no reason to do so and it does n't seem that way at all, but for the sake of it I might accept it.
So he used the wrong words in his public address for which I challenged him.
But am I responsible for him using the wrong words ?

What kind of reasonable thing can "preventive defense" mean ? In the tense atmosphere pertaining at the time as well (daily riots a.s.o.).
I do accept alternative explanations - in fact I 'm searching for any so I wrote here.

My lawyer bottled it I 'm told, also the judges were hostile.
This lawyer did n't want me to appear in court -staged a mini revolution about it- but I can talk better than he does or at least as good as he does.
The man is a family friend -so another mini revolution at home against my wish to change him.
A relative who was present also thinks so now but she says the bad acoustics of the chamber did not allow her to hear everything.
 

[YorkshireBlue 3,264]

4 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

War is unrelated.
Here what I 'm looking for is a lexicographic explanation of "preventive defense", in common law.
I described it as a neonazi-hooligan phrase tantamount to the "assault battalion" - for which the Golden Dawn has already been convicted !
Something else ?
I might accept that the person -a registered Golden Dawn member in fact- who said that did not really mean to incite people to break the peace.
I have no reason to do so and it does n't seem that way at all, but for the sake of it I might accept it.
So he used the wrong words in his public address for which I challenged him.
But am I responsible for him using the wrong words ?

What kind of reasonable thing can "preventive defense" mean ? In the tense atmosphere pertaining at the time as well (daily riots a.s.o.).
I do accept alternative explanations - in fact I 'm searching for any so I wrote here.

My lawyer bottled it I 'm told, also the judges were hostile.
This lawyer did n't want me to appear in court -staged a mini revolution about it- but I can talk better than he does or at least as good as he does.
The man is a family friend -so another mini revolution at home against my wish to change him.
A relative who was present also thinks so now but she says the bad acoustics of the chamber did not allow her to hear everything.
 

I'll be honest, I'm a simple lad, half my adult life from 16 I was in the army, the other half a roofer, you speak like an Oxford dictionary and I haven't the foggiest idea what you saying 🤣 my level of intellectual speech at work is, I fucked you mum, as well as other much worse despicable banter I cannot type in here.

[cosmicway 1,333]

4 minutes ago, YorkshireBlue said:

I'll be honest, I'm a simple lad, half my adult life from 16 I was in the army, the other half a roofer, you speak like an Oxford dictionary and I haven't the foggiest idea what you saying 🤣 my level of intellectual speech at work is, I fucked you mum, as well as other much worse despicable banter I cannot type in here.

Ok.
It's not a crime if you don't know legalese.
I learned some because I like the films with Romans, James Mason, Charles Laughton.
Also as it happens I have to go into legalese.

[Sir Mikel OBE 4,920]

 

 

[Fulham Broadway 17,299]

16 hours ago, Sir Mikel OBE said:

 

 

Thought they would rig the vote - they lie, lie, lie, lie and lie. Their default position.

[cosmicway 1,333]

I 'm not a mug.
Yes "preventive defense" is a term that can sometimes be used for legal purposes in civil affairs.
I discussed it with more people.
Putting an alarm in your car is a sort of preventive defense.
Carrying a licensed gun is another kind of preventive defense and in this case the "defense" does not materialise itself only the moment you use the gun against a target.

It may be a somewhat unusual phrase but can be described as an innocent phrase if we take the benefit of the doubt to its limits.

But still, Golden Dawn is a criminal organization, the courts (other courts) have decided so.
Golden Dawn operated in this way from 2010 to 2013 and the incident relating to the ... "not assault battalions" verdict against me last Monday happened in November 2012.
Also all their street units - formations are called "assault battalions" by everybody, from the prime minister to the last citizen and by the chief director of public prosecutions.

Edited May 16, 2024 by cosmicway