Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Free Speech/Geert Wilders on Trial
Options
Comments
-
I think if Mr SS were to take that up in the Christianity forum, he would find that the Bible is indeed regarded as the inspired Word of God.
people regard the pope as infalible. does not make it true.
every school of islamic jurisprudence teaches that the koran is the direct word of god, written down by mohammed, through the angel gabriel. true for all of time, it cannot be changed or reformed in anyway.
this clearly puts it above the bible.0 -
Brown Bomber wrote: »Mr SS I'd be interested to know if you would defend the free speech of holocaust deniers do keenly?
denying the holocaust is a LIE. Show me what lie Geert Wilders told.0 -
the islamic doctrine of abrogation means that if two verses correct each other, the one which comes later (chronologically) is the "better" verse. this means that nearly all of the peaceful verses are cancelled out by sura 9 (which also happens to be the only one that does not begin with the words "allah the peaceful the merciful", some say because there is no peace or mercy in it)0
-
So you'd have no problem with 'Jude Suss', for instance?
i cant believe you would even suggest that, of course i have a problem with it.
Once again for the umpteenth time, wilders' movie was a DOCUMENTARY, jud suss is nazi propaganda using ACTORS to purposely make Jews look bad.
How can you even compare the two, how can you compare propaganda and fact? show me the lie wilders told.
bit disappointed with that comment tbh.0 -
Ah, but if I went specific verses of the Bible are linked causally with child buggering I'd be blaming the religion not the individual for the action since I'd be claiming that the verse is the cause of the individual's actions and without the existence of this verse the actions would not have occurred.
there is nothing casual about "slay the unbelievers where-ever you find them".
show me where canon law (as the opposite to islamic law) justifies the buggery of children. because islamic law does justify the killing of unbelievers and in particular those who are not people of the book (ie jews and christians).
the individuals are of course responsible for their actions, but as we have seen throughout history ideologies can mobalise people to commit such deeds.0 -
Advertisement
-
(........)
am i that militant that i constantly have to explain myself!???
No, its that you're that wrong that you don't even realise it. Your claim for some special case for the Koran has been dealt with, and yet you're still here repeating it ad nauseam.
(Saudi is not a theocracy, by the way. Iran is)cant believe you would even suggest that, of course i have a problem with it.
Once again for the umpteenth time, wilders' movie was a DOCUMENTARY, jud suss is nazi propaganda using ACTORS to purposely make Jews look bad.
How can you even compare the two, how can you compare propaganda and fact? show me the lie wilders told.
bit disappointed with that comment tbh.
So its ok if I go back through the events of the last 50 years and select negative events involving jews, then grab a few selections from the 613 Mitzvot and Torah, slap it all together in a 20 minute "documentary" and say 'show me the lie in that'?0 -
No, it’s a monarchy.Yes its saudi arabia. is saudi arabia not a theocracy no?
You stated that Christians are “fighting for survival” in several parts of the world. I merely pointed out that the same is true of Muslims in other parts of the world. Persecution is not exclusively practiced by Muslims.of course they have, what's that got to do with anything?
Off the top of my head, the LRA in Uganda. I’m sure there are more.yes the bible has violent verses but show me a terrorist group commiting terrorist acts and justifying them with reference to the bible?0 -
he has consistantly stated that a society based on christianity/judaism and humanism is better than one based on Islam.
I have never heard him say he wants a society based solely on christianity, i have never heard him say he wants to erradicate islam from europe. he has never said he hates muslims or any other group of people.
He is on trial for less than the slander you have just stated.
Yes, he has said that a society based on anything other than Islam is better.
However, he has some pretty solid feelings towards Islam. That's my issue.
Here's some quotes:
"The Koran is an inspiration for intolerance, murder and terror." (Source: BBC News, 28 February 2008)
- "Moderate Islam? That's a contradiction." (Source: Spiegel.de, 31 March 2008)
- "Take a walk down the street and see where this is going. You no longer feel like you are living in your own country. There is a battle going on and we have to defend ourselves. Before you know it there will be more mosques than churches!" (Source: Expatica, Internet Archive, 13 February 2007)
-"Islam is the Trojan Horse in Europe. If we do not stop Islamification now, Eurabia and Netherabia will just be a matter of time....We are heading for the end of European and Dutch civilisation as we know it."
Raphael MacNamara adds:
Those Quotes are tame.
He called Islam a "retarded religion"
He has said that Cultural Relativism is the Disease of Western Culture.
When asked bye a reporter about taxing Islamic head dress for women, he said it doesn't matter what they think/want, he wasn't elected by them, he was elected by people that think like him... aka racist!
He claims to be promoting humanistic and christian and jewish values but says that that the Netherlands has been "too tolerant"! and that their should be exceptions to human rights to save his "cultures dominance".
He wants to stop Muslims from being able enter his country, actually he says they have to be stopped, but also he welcomes Muslim culture in another interview.... (as long as they don't believe in Islam, I guess)
He wants to outlaw Muslim symbolism.
He said Israel was BRAVE in bombing Gaza and he hoped the Netherlands would do the same thing....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWa-6lM9t8E
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88blBiWV8AY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tAE0ZIb--I
Slander? I think not. Merely opinion based on what he has said.0 -
i cant believe you would even suggest that, of course i have a problem with it.
Once again for the umpteenth time, wilders' movie was a DOCUMENTARY, jud suss is nazi propaganda using ACTORS to purposely make Jews look bad.
How can you even compare the two, how can you compare propaganda and fact? show me the lie wilders told.
bit disappointed with that comment tbh.
The Lies are Implicit. How hard is that to understand? Truth which is skewed, can make a lie.
If I show one side of a topic, I am lying by omission. If I fail to ever acknowledge that there is worth in the thing I attack, even a small glimmer of good, then that is omitting relevant information. A history if Islam is not required, merely some objective criticism.
Anyway, I bow out now...0 -
Why does he have to show both sides? With all due respect, expecting everything you read or watch to be balanced and fair is not going to end well.
Personally I don't think too much of Geert Wilders. That said, I don't think he broke any laws, and shouldn't be punished. Fitna was clearly aimed at one aspect of Islam, but anyone offended by it would be better served showing why/how its unbalanced rather than trying to punish people for speaking out against them.
I'd hate for free speech to take a hit over an idiot like him.0 -
Advertisement
-
Slander and libel is where you attack the character and reputation of a person.
Attacking a concept, an idea, a political or social view ( all of which describe Islam), even badly, even in a mistaken fashion, even if it causes offence is not slander. Ideas should not be above criticism.
The point of my previous post was to show that there are limits on Free Speech. It is not an absolute right.
We have slander and libel laws precisely because we prioritise one person's "good name" over the right of another to use Free Speech to "attack the character and reputation of a person".
Were we absolute purists (on the concept of Free Speech), we'd probably wouldn't prioritise concepts such as the "character and reputation of a person" over the right of Free Speech. After all, "character" and "reputation" are ultimately just ideas, and if one holds the view that "Ideas should not be above criticism", then we probably should allow criticism of a person's "character" and "reputation" on the grounds that these are just ideas.
As it is, the Council of Europe's Convention for the Protection of Human Rights qualifies the right to Freedom of Expression as can be seen below:
Hence, it is perfectly consistent with the right to Freedom of Expression to prosecute people if they abuse that right.[FONT=Arial,Bold][FONT=Arial,Bold]Article 10 . Freedom of expression[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Bold]- Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. [.................................]
-
The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
To claim the trial of Mr Wilders is a "political trial", as the OP did, would strike me as an over-reaction.0 - Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. [.................................]
-
So its ok if I go back through the events of the last 50 years and select negative events involving jews, then grab a few selections from the 613 Mitzvot and Torah, slap it all together in a 20 minute "documentary" and say 'show me the lie in that'?
if you also had rabbi's preaching it, and the terrorists themselves justifying their actions with reference to the Mitzvot and Torah then yes you could! and dont water it down we are not talking about negative events, were talking about large scale acts of terror, nearly all of which were in the last ten years ( i suppose you said 50 to suit your point), that are featured in fitna.
i accept some of the first jews to arrive used this as an excuse for what they were doing.
the point is that jewish terrorism is not a world-wide problem, it is localised to a very small area.
the madrid bomber left a note saying "this was for andaluthia", as in this is for when you kicked the muslims out 400 years ago. this shows the motivation is well thought out and not just random nut jobs.0 -
-
it is an absolute islamic monarchy. which essentialy means a theocracy, and after the taliban were ousted it became the strictest islamic state in the world, if you wana split hairs you can but for everything but name it is a theocracy.No, it’s a monarchy.
You stated that Christians are “fighting for survival” in several parts of the world. I merely pointed out that the same is true of Muslims in other parts of the world. Persecution is not exclusively practiced by Muslims.
Off the top of my head, the LRA in Uganda. I’m sure there are more.
when did i say muslims weren't facing persecution? or that they exclusively carry out terrorism?
as with most things it comes down to majorities. and there are far more conflicts were jihadists are the aggressors then the victims. again just this week in Jos, the conflict was re-ignited because jihadists set a church alight with people inside. between that and the immediate fighting 27 were dead. and by the time christians took revenge and fighting started there were 552 dead.0 -
-
no. he has said this because those are the values of western society, whether you like to admit it or not, it is based on humanism and judeo-christian values.Yes, he has said that a society based on anything other than Islam is better.
where does he say muslims are bad people? all of those quotes are attacking the religion, not the people.However, he has some pretty solid feelings towards Islam. That's my issue.
Here's some quotes:
"The Koran is an inspiration for intolerance, murder and terror." (Source: BBC News, 28 February 2008)
- "Moderate Islam? That's a contradiction." (Source: Spiegel.de, 31 March 2008)
- "Take a walk down the street and see where this is going. You no longer feel like you are living in your own country. There is a battle going on and we have to defend ourselves. Before you know it there will be more mosques than churches!" (Source: Expatica, Internet Archive, 13 February 2007)
-"Islam is the Trojan Horse in Europe. If we do not stop Islamification now, Eurabia and Netherabia will just be a matter of time....We are heading for the end of European and Dutch civilisation as we know it."
again nothing more than when Richard Dawkins (who actually targets the worshipers themselves), calls followers of religion "dillusional".
and? hes attacking the idea, plus the second one is his own opinion.He called Islam a "retarded religion"
He has said that Cultural Relativism is the Disease of Western Culture.
do you believe cultures with islamic law are relative to our own? because i pressume you are female?
you are miss-representing the quote, he goes on to say that if women are wearing the head-dress they will not make dutch friends, they will find it hard to get a job, therefore will not learn the language and hence will not integrate into society.When asked bye a reporter about taxing Islamic head dress for women, he said it doesn't matter what they think/want, he wasn't elected by them, he was elected by people that think like him... aka racist!
the exceptions he outlines are for people who are consistently breaking the law or engaged with terrorism.He claims to be promoting humanistic and christian and jewish values but says that that the Netherlands has been "too tolerant"! and that their should be exceptions to human rights to save his "cultures dominance".
once again he goes on to say once they dont believe in the elements of islam which contradict Dutch law. and repeated says the overwhealming majority of muslims are good law-abisding people.He wants to stop Muslims from being able enter his country, actually he says they have to be stopped, but also he welcomes Muslim culture in another interview.... (as long as they don't believe in Islam, I guess)
so do france.He wants to outlaw Muslim symbolism.
I too hope ireland would not wait to retaliate before 324 rockets were fired, as israel has done. although I wont be pulled off topic re this point so take it as my opinion, not as fact.He said Israel was BRAVE in bombing Gaza and he hoped the Netherlands would do the same thing....
when you called him/his constituants "racist" it was pretty slanderous.Slander? I think not. Merely opinion based on what he has said.
considering he has always said he is not and has shown so as he wants no association with racist parties around europe, most of whom have links to each other.
also, considering if elections were held in the morning the PVV would be the second biggest party and therefore be in government (unless all the other parties got together which would not happen), would you then condsider the dutch government racist? or a large percentage of their people?0 -
-
....again, using the actions of a minority to justify blanket rants against the whole. Which of course, is what Wilders does.
he consistently says the over whealming majority of muslims are good people. where are you even getting your info from that you dont even know that?
its no different from the media here who never stop giving out about the catholic church but they never give out about catholics themselves (well rarely).0 -
no. he has said this because those are the values of western society, whether you like to admit it or not, it is based on humanism and judeo-christian values.
where does he say muslims are bad people? all of those quotes are attacking the religion, not the people.
again nothing more than when Richard Dawkins (who actually targets the worshipers themselves), calls followers of religion "dillusional".
and? hes attacking the idea, plus the second one is his own opinion.
do you believe cultures with islamic law are relative to our own? because i pressume you are female?
you are miss-representing the quote, he goes on to say that if women are wearing the head-dress they will not make dutch friends, they will find it hard to get a job, therefore will not learn the language and hence will not integrate into society.
the exceptions he outlines are for people who are consistently breaking the law or engaged with terrorism.
once again he goes on to say once they dont believe in the elements of islam which contradict Dutch law. and repeated says the overwhealming majority of muslims are good law-abisding people.
so do france.
I too hope ireland would not wait to retaliate before 324 rockets were fired, as israel has done. although I wont be pulled off topic re this point so take it as my opinion, not as fact.
when you called him/his constituants "racist" it was pretty slanderous.
considering he has always said he is not and has shown so as he wants no association with racist parties around europe, most of whom have links to each other.
also, considering if elections were held in the morning the PVV would be the second biggest party and therefore be in government (unless all the other parties got together which would not happen), would you then condsider the dutch government racist? or a large percentage of their people?
Just two things...lol...
One, I didn't say racist, I should have clarified when I was quoting another person on a website full of Wilders quotes. For the ambiguity I'm sorry, I should have been more careful. I do read into his words that he doesn't really like muslims, and wouldn't be limited to disliking just Islam itself if you searched his heart.
But I didn't mean to imply I called him a racist...
And the other thing is, just for the record, personally I think the world'd be better off if we forgot all these supernatural, superficial barriers between people and just got on with being nice to each other. Considering that's not the world we live in, however, I'm more likely to take issue with bad logic, bad arguments and being generally mean for no reason, lol....
Now I really have to go focus on Irish :P0 -
Just two things...lol...
One, I didn't say racist, I should have clarified when I was quoting another person on a website full of Wilders quotes. For the ambiguity I'm sorry, I should have been more careful. I do read into his words that he doesn't really like muslims, and wouldn't be limited to disliking just Islam itself if you searched his heart.
But I didn't mean to imply I called him a racist...
And the other thing is, just for the record, personally I think the world'd be better off if we forgot all these supernatural, superficial barriers between people and just got on with being nice to each other. Considering that's not the world we live in, however, I'm more likely to take issue with bad logic, bad arguments and being generally mean for no reason, lol....
Now I really have to go focus on Irish :P
Fair enough, best of luck!0 -
Advertisement
-
denying the holocaust is a LIE. Show me what lie Geert Wilders told.
If we can assume that he is not completely ignorant of the Holy Qur'an and Islam then he is clearly lying through omission in his propanda film. Free speech comes with certain responsibilities for me and with his hate-filled ignorant rant against Islam by portraying all Moslems as blood-thirsty murderers he fell way short of these responsibilties.
I could easily make such a disgustingly biased movie about Jews or Christians for a target audience who is essentially ignorant of both groups.
I could read from the Judaism's holiest book The Talmud
- Sanhedrin 58b. If a heathen (gentile) hits a Jew, the gentile must be killed.
- Sanhedrin 57a . When a Jew murders a gentile ("Cuthean"), there will be no death penalty. What a Jew steals from a gentile he may keep.
- Yebamoth 98a. All gentile children are animals.
- Abodah Zarah 36b. Gentile girls are in a state of niddah (filth) from birth.
- Abodah Zarah 22a-22b . Gentiles prefer sex with cows
And cut in and out of terrorist attacks carried out in the name of Judaism.
If I did it would be horribly bigoted of me, and clearly it would in no way be representative of Judaism today or Jewish people bar some fringe radical groups. But it would be exactly what Wilders has done to Islam and Moslems.
But if I did, would you defend my freedom of speech?0 -
he consistently says the over whealming majority of muslims are good people. where are you even getting your info from that you dont even know that?
Ye wha?Islam is the Trojan Horse in Europe. If we do not stop Islamification now, Eurabia and Netherabia will just be a matter of time....We are heading for the end of European and Dutch civilisation as we know it
Arguing for his freedom to be a bigoted prick is one thing, but denying he is one is taking the proverbial....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geert_Wilders0 -
If you did then you would look like a bigoted idiot and your movie would be written off as rubbish. Bit like most peoples opinion of Wilder and his film. Should you be punished for making it or holding those opinions? absolutely not, ridiculed at worst.Brown Bomber wrote: »I could easily make such a disgustingly biased movie about Jews or Christians for a target audience who is essentially ignorant of both groups.
I could read from the Judaism's holiest book The Talmud
- Sanhedrin 58b. If a heathen (gentile) hits a Jew, the gentile must be killed.
- Sanhedrin 57a . When a Jew murders a gentile ("Cuthean"), there will be no death penalty. What a Jew steals from a gentile he may keep.
- Yebamoth 98a. All gentile children are animals.
- Abodah Zarah 36b. Gentile girls are in a state of niddah (filth) from birth.
- Abodah Zarah 22a-22b . Gentiles prefer sex with cows
And cut in and out of terrorist attacks carried out in the name of Judaism.
If I did it would be horribly bigoted of me, and clearly it would in no way be representative of Judaism today or Jewish people bar some fringe radical groups. But it would be exactly what Wilders has done to Islam and Moslems.
But if I did, would you defend my freedom of speech?0 -
you just said it. his rant was against Islam, not individual muslims which mr. Wilders has again and again said he has no problem with.Brown Bomber wrote: »his hate-filled ignorant rant against Islam by portraying all Moslems as blood-thirsty murderers he fell way short of these responsibilties.
this people exist (jihadists). they are not a fabrication, they are a serious and CURRENT threat. Mr. Wilders' film is representative of THEM not of muslims on the whole, which he has continuously stated.
I am certainly not ignorant of Islam.Brown Bomber wrote: »I could easily make such a disgustingly biased movie about Jews or Christians for a target audience who is essentially ignorant of both groups.
It would quite simply not be possible to make this movie as you suggest unless you go back in time. As I said, islamic terrorists are a CURRENT threat.
an example of this please?Brown Bomber wrote: »I could read from the Judaism's holiest book The Talmud
- Sanhedrin 58b. If a heathen (gentile) hits a Jew, the gentile must be killed.
examples of people carrying out these things please? because thats what wilders was able to do.Brown Bomber wrote: »- Sanhedrin 57a . When a Jew murders a gentile ("Cuthean"), there will be no death penalty. What a Jew steals from a gentile he may keep.
- Yebamoth 98a. All gentile children are animals.
- Abodah Zarah 36b. Gentile girls are in a state of niddah (filth) from birth.
- Abodah Zarah 22a-22b . Gentiles prefer sex with cows
as i said before, even if one takes the state of israel to be terrorist (which i dont), jewish terrorism is a localised problem, not a world-wide one.Brown Bomber wrote: »And cut in and out of terrorist attacks carried out in the name of Judaism.
if you were able to make such a film, and you were not lying then of course I would as where would the problem be? you would just be telling the truth.Brown Bomber wrote: »But if I did, would you defend my freedom of speech?
I would then go and find some ballance because expecting things to be balanced is rare and juvenile imo.
i believe wilders has balanced fitna as he consistantly says the over-whealming majority of muslims have no inclination towards terrorism and are welcome to stay in the netherlands. even though it was not an opinion piece and so there is no responsibility on him to do so.0 -
you said he rants against all muslims. that is not true. I corrected you.Ye wha?
i believe what he says when he says he is not a bigot, because he has never made a comment against muslims as a whole, he has made them against jihadists and those who reject western society and yet choose to live here, which is what we all should be doing.Arguing for his freedom to be a bigoted prick is one thing, but denying he is one is taking the proverbial....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geert_Wilders
he does not believe in cultural relativism, this is the only thing that could draw you to this conclusion.
So do you believe that Cultures which use islamic law are realative to our own?
because i certainly do not believe lashing a woman who has just been raped is acceptable.0 -
-
This is was he himself thinks as opposed to reading secondary sources:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KH8f2uuOOHQ
I really don't see a problem! and he certainly does not hate muslims.0 -
Advertisement