Subject: »NEWS AROUND THE WORLD

I think it's dangerous that you call the expression of an opinion you disagree with a crime. Look at the history when expressing an opinion was a crime.

I think it's criminal to write and say thing YOU DON'T KNOW about economical (or worst, what you know it's false!!!).
It's something I believe morally wrong.

but the idea of punishing someone for it is so stupid I will nevere ever thought about..
When someone ask you for a street indication there are some rule that impose you to respond the truth?
No,
still is criminal to send people away from their destination, no?

or worst, what you know it's false!!!

You can't look in Rumpil's head, so you can't know if he actually believes what he says or not. According to your logic, you committed a crime here.

It's something I believe morally wrong.

And everything you consider morally wrong is a crime? Once again, look at the history. Expressing an opinion should never be a crime. We're not the Soviet Union. Let this union (EU) not take over the habits of the USSR.

When someone ask you for a street indication there are some rule that impose you to respond the truth?
No, still is criminal to send people away from their destination, no?

Of course that's not a crime. It's childish.

I don't think you know what the English word 'crime' means. Not that that surprises me.

I don't think you know what the English word 'crime' means. Not that that surprises me.

look:
A crime, also called an offence or a criminal offence, is an act harmful not only to some individual, but also to the community or the state (a public wrong)

anyway.
Everybody else intended correctly what i wrote.
you (missing any kind of interest IN the discussion) decided to look at words searching for a mistake.
Here you are:
You are right.
I don't mean I want nobody to be forced to say or not to say anything.
Still i believe that's a behavior that need to be described as "criminal", because it can cause enormous damage.

Is that clear enough for you?
Do I need to repeat I don't want NEVER to touch freedom of speech?

solved in private....

Italy didnt live in totalism where people were persecuted for their opinions, but you live there now.... :-(

When you lose your currency change rate sovranity the only other leverage you have is the labour cost.
so Euro is once again the guilty.

I told you my opinion on money cheating by huge inflation.... i have nothing to add...

It's childish.

you would be very surprised how much people in EU (middle and north maybe) think what I am saying here :-)
Just nobody will tell it here, cos nobody like attacking and so...but I am resistant :-)

I told you my opinion on money cheating by huge inflation.

LOL you know nothing.
in '92 Italy devaluate "LIRA" near 20% (after exiting first euro area experiment), inflaction was almost still..

Still i believe that's a behavior that need to be described as "criminal", because it can cause enormous damage.

The word 'criminal' is essential in the debate. It doesn't fit in that context. Just use 'wrong'.

Everybody else intended correctly what i wrote.

Those 2 to 3 people who still read what you write you mean.

Do I need to repeat I don't want NEVER to touch freedom of speech?

Do you want to allow racism ('the Jew is evil', 'the Black is lazy', ...)? If so, then you can say you defend freedom of speech.

you would be very surprised how much people in EU (middle and north maybe) think what I am saying here :-)

Well, for starters, my reply ("It's childish.") was to someone purposely giving the wrong directions when someone else asks what way he has to go get somewhere. Secondly, I would not be surprised, because 95% (at least) of the people are complete morons. Last but not least, people agreeing with you doesn't make your speech right. If 99% of the people tell you that you are a dog, will that be the truth? No. Truth is not a democratic vote.

Those 2 to 3 people who still read what you write you mean.

still someone.

Do you want to allow racism ('the Jew is evil', 'the Black is lazy', ...)? If so, then you can say you defend freedom of speech.

yes obviously.
But why are you trying to take this discussion away from interesting facts to end talking about my personal preferences (that are nothing more than a democratic attitude..)?

:-D, ok :-)

Which interesting facts? The fact that Italy spends too much money?

btw...nobody mention here (or maybe somebody did) that case with bolivian president and international law violence when they force land down president airplane to check if there is not Snowden.

It was really significant breach of international law.

What do you think ? Can USA and states if USA ask them do everything, no matter that they breach international law ? (I hope word breach as terminate is ok)

Is there really something like "international law" valid anymore ???

"Secondly, I would not be surprised, because 95% (at least) of the people are complete morons. Last but not least, people agreeing with you doesn't make your speech right. If 99% of the people tell you that you are a dog, will that be the truth? No. Truth is not a democratic vote."

There are many idiots around, but considering your estimation of moron ratio I cant understand how you may propagate libertarianism. In fact its deadly argument againist libertarianism. If you believe that majority of people are idiots, then it also mean that majority of people cant decide for themselves and socialist/collectivist help is needed for survival of majority of people.
(edited)

simply, because he doesn't care about the survival of the majority of people.
he simpy believes the dog eat dog rule.