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
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

It's ok to say the unpleasant truths.

  • 23-06-2011 12:34pm
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,346 ✭✭✭Rev Hellfire


    Excellent news from the Netherlands, its good to see the courts push back against increasing attempts by some to seek censorship of any criticism of their views.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13883331


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,298 ✭✭✭cosmicfart


    maybe they can show the cartoon of Muhammad now without getting all hot and bothered like a bunch of to year olds


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,449 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    A frightful guy, but good to see the Dutch stand up to militant islam.


  • Posts: 0 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Dakota Scrawny Self-confidence


    interesting
    Even during the trial, the prosecutors had called for Mr Wilders to be acquitted, saying that while his remarks were offensive they should be part of legitimate political debate


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 51,665 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    what the hell was the court case about so?
    It is believed the plaintiffs may attempt to make their case before a European court or the UN.

    Their lawyer, Ties Prakken, was quoted by Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf as saying they were "deeply disappointed" and believed the right of minorities to be protected against hate speech had been violated.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,092 ✭✭✭CiaranMT


    robindch wrote: »
    A frightful guy, but good to see the Dutch stand up to militant islam.

    The only side with militant leanings in this case seems to be Mr Wilders.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,770 ✭✭✭Bottle_of_Smoke


    Great decision. The race card is always so easily pulled but its clear Wilders is against Islam because of Islam and not because he's a racist(wheareas the likes of Nick Griffin definitely is), and the Dutch courts obviously recognised this.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,449 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    CiaranMT wrote: »
    The only side with militant leanings in this case seems to be Mr Wilders.
    These guys might disagree:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pim_Fortuyn (murdered, 2002)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theo_van_Gogh_%28film_director%29 (murdered, 2004)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    Great decision.

    Agreed, free speech ftw.
    The race card is always so easily pulled but its clear Wilders is against Islam because of Islam and not because he's a racist(wheareas the likes of Nick Griffin definitely is), and the Dutch courts obviously recognised this.

    I'm not so sure. His policies completely across the board are basically identical to the BNP's in every single way.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    robindch wrote: »

    Why is Pim Fortuyn in there?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,346 ✭✭✭Rev Hellfire


    Nodin wrote: »
    Why is Pim Fortuyn in there?
    Because he was murdered due his views of Islam and how he expressed them.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Because he was murdered due his views of Islam and how he expressed them.

    He wasn't killed by a muslim, "militant Islam" or indeed for those views of his alone.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,449 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Nodin wrote: »
    He wasn't killed by a muslim, "militant Islam" or indeed for those views of his alone.
    He wasn't, but the question was whether or not Wilders was the only guy with "militant leanings".


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭recedite




  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    robindch wrote: »
    He wasn't, but the question was whether or not Wilders was the only guy with "militant leanings".

    The sequence of comments
    A frightful guy, but good to see the Dutch stand up to militant islam.
    (my bold)
    The only side with militant leanings in this case seems to be Mr Wilders.
    (my bold)

    Fortuyn was not killed by a muslim, so its hardly pertinent.

    Furthermore, the film itself does not target "militant Islam" but essentially seeks to tar all muslims with the same brush by selective quotes etc. It's techniques are not unsimilar to that used in Der Ewige Jude.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Even during the trial, the prosecutors had called for Mr Wilders to be acquitted
    what the hell was the court case about so?

    Our legal system descends from the UK system where the Plaintiff and the Defendant argue it out in court.

    Most Continental countries derive their system from the Napoleonic Code, whereby the plaintiff makes a complaint, and that is investigated by a State Prosecuter. So the prosecuter starts out neutral, but after making investigations, he presents the evidence and may come out with recommendations in favour of one or other side.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,449 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Nodin wrote: »
    The sequence of comments
    Yes, but the "islamic" bit was dropped between my post and Ciaran's -- the debate was widened.
    Nodin wrote: »
    Furthermore, the film itself does not target "militant Islam" but essentially seeks to tar all muslims with the same brush by selective quotes etc.
    As above, I don't like Mr Wilders and I suspect I wouldn't like Fitna if I had the time or inclination to watch it.

    However, the Dutch court case distinguished between attacking ideas and attacking a person or group and it decided that, for the comments for which he was prosecuted, he was (just about) attacking ideas. And that's fine by me.

    If, on the other hand, he's going around the place saying obnoxious things about people instead of the religion they hold, then he should be immediately prosecuted for incitement to hatred - a prosecution which I hope and trust would be successful.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Nodin wrote: »
    Furthermore, the film itself does not target "militant Islam" but essentially seeks to tar all muslims with the same brush
    Eh... the muslims in the film are waving swords and shouting for the unbelievers to be killed....


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    recedite wrote: »
    Eh... the muslims in the film are waving swords and shouting for the unbelievers to be killed....


    ....many are. Others are calling for various deaths etc and so on. there are no Sufis, no moderates, not a thing. Extremism is portrayed as the norm. Hence the problem. Its like grabbing Ariel Sharon, a few settler rabbis and making a movie called "Heres Judaism"


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,346 ✭✭✭Rev Hellfire


    Nodin wrote: »
    Fortuyn was not killed by a muslim, so its hardly pertinent.
    He might not have been killed by a Muslim, but he was killed in the name of Muslims.
    Volkert van der Graaf stated his goal was to stop Mr Fortuyn exploiting Muslims as "scapegoats" and targeting "the weak parts of society to score points" to try to gain political power.

    Seems pretty pertinent to me since the issue is the stifling of speech either through threats, legislature or in the previous cases actual violence.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Nodin wrote: »
    Its like grabbing Ariel Sharon, a few settler rabbis and making a movie called "Heres Judaism"
    That would be more like "Here's Zionism". The film title "Fitna" translates as purification through fire, or civil war. It derives from the older arab word for the smelting or purification of metal, which came to be applied whenever the expansionist Mohammedan armies "cleansed" an area of infidel tribes.

    The film quotes various passages from the koran which recommend killing unbelievers, then superimposes the text onto video of militant bitter old clerics urging these kinds of actions, and finally shows the angry young men actually carrying out the actions.

    Then the film urges moderate muslims to tear out the objectionable pages from their own copies of the koran.

    Of course I am well aware that there are plenty of bloodthirsty passages in the old testament relating to the "smiting" of enemies, but generally these are kept out of sermons. Anyway, I'm not here to defend Christians or Jews.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    recedite wrote: »
    That would be more like "Here's Zionism". ...............

    O theres plenty of stuff that can be used to make a more general stab than that.
    He might not have been killed by a Muslim, but he was killed in the name of Muslims. ...............

    Not by one, somebody involved with them, asked by them, or in any way connected. Funny enough, I wasn't aware that the case against extremism was so poor it had to stretch connections in such a manner just to prop up the argument.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,346 ✭✭✭Rev Hellfire


    Nodin wrote: »
    Not by one, somebody involved with them, asked by them, or in any way connected. Funny enough, I wasn't aware that the case against extremism was so poor it had to stretch connections in such a manner just to prop up the argument.
    You feel killing someone because you disagree with their views isn't extreme... interesting...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,097 ✭✭✭kiffer


    So only one of the linked men was murdered by 'militant islam'?
    Sure that's 50% less murder!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    You feel killing someone because you disagree with their views isn't extreme... interesting...

    'the case against Islamic extremism'. As I referred to stretched connections, I fail to see how you got that meaning out of it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,650 ✭✭✭sensibleken


    I can still headbutt the guy if i meet him in international waters right?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Yes, the fatwa has been issued against him.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    I can still headbutt the guy if i meet him in international waters right?

    I can't condone that kind of violence.



    If you shave off his crap hairdo though,and clip off an ear in the process accidentally, thats just a manly jape between men.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,346 ✭✭✭Rev Hellfire


    Nodin wrote: »
    'the case against Islamic extremism'. As I referred to stretched connections, I fail to see how you got that meaning out of it.
    What meaning is this ?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    What meaning is this ?

    The one you posted below -

    You feel killing someone because you disagree with their views isn't extreme... interesting...


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,346 ✭✭✭Rev Hellfire


    Nodin wrote: »
    The one you posted below -

    So your saying a vegan killing someone because they disagree with them is OK since they're not an Islamic extremist.

    Ohh I see, my apology's that makes perfect sense now.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    So your saying a vegan killing someone because they disagree with them is OK since they're not an Islamic extremist.

    Ohh I see, my apology's that makes perfect sense now.

    It was perfectly clear what I meant. You tried to imply that the statement below
    Funny enough, I wasn't aware that the case against extremism was so poor it had to stretch connections in such a manner just to prop up the argument.

    meant that I didn't regard the killing as extreme. Now you seek to distort the meaning of my further clarification (which rather foolishly allowed that you may have had genuinely misread what I typed). Why you feel the need to try and needle away over a perfectly straight forward statement I do not know.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,346 ✭✭✭Rev Hellfire


    Nodin wrote: »
    I didn't regard the killing as extreme.
    Are you seriously saying murdering someone because you disagree with their views isn't extreme, the mind boggles.
    Nodin wrote: »
    Why you feel the need to try and needle away over a perfectly straight forward statement I do not know.
    You know you're on the internets right ?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    hillarious.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,449 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    ^^^ ok folks, back on topic, please!


Advertisement