“It is irrelevant whether Wilder’s witnesses might prove Wilders’ observations to be correct”, the ‘Openbaar Ministerie’ stated, “what’s relevant is that his observations are illegal”.
From Geert Wilders' trial before the Dutch Openbaar Ministerie. Says the court:
Shrugging off Spinoza - Sappho
I would hope I need not explain the problem here.
I find it paradoxical that Geert Wilders and its supporters bitch about being "censored" and say they promote "free speech" while they want to ban the koran because they consider that it "incites hatred".
The right to freedom of speech is not absolute. There are limitations such as hatespeech, or calling out for violence. The argument Wilders makes is that the Koran is dripping with incitement of hatred and violence against Jews, Christians, pagans, women, atheists and apostates. Wilders was simply asking for consistent application of the Dutch law. He had no illusions about getting the Koran banned, there's no support for. He just wanted to use the attention so he could give numerous examples of hatred and violence against Jews, Christians, pagans, women, atheists and apostates in the Koran.I find it paradoxical that Geert Wilders and its supporters bitch about being "censored" and say they promote "free speech" while they want to ban the koran because they consider that it "incites hatred".
The right to freedom of speech is not absolute. There are limitations such as hatespeech, or calling out for violence. The argument Wilders makes is that the Koran is dripping with incitement of hatred and violence against Jews, Christians, pagans, women, atheists and apostates. Wilders was simply asking for consistent application of the Dutch law. He had no illusions about getting the Koran banned, there's no support for. He just wanted to use the attention so he could give numerous examples of hatred and violence against Jews, Christians, pagans, women, atheists and apostates in the Koran.
Wilders is gaining groud, they're trying to handle him just like Pim Fortuyn. Sometimes people forget that Pim Fortuyn, busy winning the 2002 elections, predicted his own death on national television. Pretty extreme huh?!
I find it paradoxical that Geert Wilders and its supporters bitch about being "censored" and say they promote "free speech" while they want to ban the koran because they consider that it "incites hatred".
The right to freedom of speech is not absolute. There are limitations such as hatespeech, or calling out for violence. The argument Wilders makes is that the Koran is dripping with incitement of hatred and violence against Jews, Christians, pagans, women, atheists and apostates. Wilders was simply asking for consistent application of the Dutch law. He had no illusions about getting the Koran banned, there's no support for. He just wanted to use the attention so he could give numerous examples of hatred and violence against Jews, Christians, pagans, women, atheists and apostates in the Koran.
Wilders is gaining groud, they're trying to handle him just like Pim Fortuyn. Sometimes people forget that Pim Fortuyn, busy winning the 2002 elections, predicted his own death on national television. Pretty extreme huh?!
I disagree, Fitna does not call for violence, it doesn't incite hatred either. Wilders is being prosecuted for Fitna though...Then the same argument is valid for Wilder's movieFitna. If he wants to ban the koran because it incites hatespeech, then his own movie should be banned too.
I disagree, Fitna does not call for violence, it doesn't incite hatred either. Wilders is being prosecuted for Fitna though...
Then the same argument is valid for Wilder's movieFitna. If he wants to ban the koran because it incites hatespeech, then his own movie should be banned too.
If you poke the hornets' nest you end up getting stung, or banned from telling the truth to protect the hornets.
Only if the Q'ran is actually banned. Since that particular book HASN'T been banned, then Wilder's movie shouldn't, either.
Only if the Q'ran is actually banned. Since that particular book HASN'T been banned, then Wilder's movie shouldn't, either.
Gardener, you found the paradox!!!
Why are dutch Imams, who make speeches about throwing gays from apartement buildings, not being prosecuted, while Wilders is.so the question is "why would be wilder's movie censored because of hatespeech while the koran isn't", right?
Why are dutch Imams, who make speeches about throwing gays from apartement buildings, not being prosecuted, while Wilders is.
I still hold the position that Fitna does not incite hatred while the Koran does. However, I don't agree with banning books, no matter how vile their content. I am an absolutist when it comes to the freedom of speech. The reason I'll probably vote for Wilders next election is not because of his program, it's about being extremely annoyed with the Left trying to demonize him.
Yes, the example came from an imam in Rotterdam. More importantly, gay bashing is on the rise, the gay community has been complaining about it for years.Those who say that should be prosecuted. Is there an example of imams saying such things and not being prosecuted?
Koran ban, veil tax, he's an attention whore.If you defend freedom of speech I can understand why you don't like Wilder's program.
I do like some of his ideas.
Yes, the example came from an imam in Rotterdam. More importantly, gay bashing is on the rise, the gay community has been complaining about it for years.
Koran ban, veil tax, he's an attention whore.
nope.and this guy is not being sued?
Which part of the judeo-christian heritage deserves this credit? In my view we should be proud of our philosophers, our scientists, of secular humanism.Those are the kind of measures I would support, since we are a Judeo-Christian continent.
nope.
Which part of the judeo-christian heritage deserves this credit? In my view we should be proud of our philosophers, our scientists, of secular humanism.
It's very selective, a dutch cartoon maker got an arrest team.then the Dutch justice is not very efficient
I wouldn't, but some parts of Europe have been islamic for centuries, and Islam did have a quite important influence on medieval Europe, in terms of governance and science.Of course, but our roots are still Christian, we should not deny it.
I wouldn't, but some parts of Europe have been islamic for centuries, and Islam did have a quite important influence on medieval Europe, in terms of governance and science.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?