Dutch lawmaker Wilders in court on hate speech charges

[PakPuk]

Good luck to Mr Wilders.

 

[zimmer]

You need to dig into your history books a bit more and look at your own country where almost all book bannings and attempts of such, happen in red states and are done by right wing politicians. Not saying politicians on the left are totally blameless, but you need to revise your views a tad.

Nice try... and no revision...

I'd never heard of any such thing (remember... freedom of speech enshrined in 1791) but go google... book burning southern states USA... no results. Now National Socialists burned books, Jews and art they deemed unfit. Those tolerant Leftists.

 

[zimmer]

That is your opinion that it is wiser, when I look at the KKK or neo nazi's marching then I think the Dutch law is wiser. But again that is my opinion as a Dutch person but the same goes for pro-Palestine demonstrations, if people say Jew hating comments they too should be prosecuted. It is not because this is Wilders or just because something is anti-Muslim that I agree with this prosecution.

So long as they do not incite violence, then they should be able to say what they like. Free speech is free speech, and some people may not like it... too bad... the Stalinist alternative is far worse.

Where is the line? Wilders case reveals it is not just a fine line... it is absurdly sensitive.

The slope is icy slippery, and proof of this is having a court case against someone who says... "...more Moroccans or fewer..."

And the following? From across the border? Using The Wilders Standard, these float creators should be behind bars.

Kölle!!! Kölle!!! Kölle!!!

Da simmer dabei! Dat es prima! VIVA COLONIA!

 

[Grant]

So long as they do not incite violence, then they should be able to say what they like. Free speech is free speech, and some people may not like it... too bad... the Stalinist alternative is far worse.

Where is the line? Wilders case reveals it is not just a fine line... it is absurdly sensitive.

The slope is icy slippery, and proof of this is having a court case against someone who says... "...more Moroccans or fewer..."

And the following? From across the border? Using The Wilders Standard, these float creators should be behind bars.

Kölle!!! Kölle!!! Kölle!!!

Da simmer dabei! Dat es prima! VIVA COLONIA!

It's telling that you can ask the question "More Moroccans or fewer" on these boards and not get thread banned but say the same thing in the Netherlands and you'll get hauled before the courts.

 

[Peter King]

So long as they do not incite violence, then they should be able to say what they like. Free speech is free speech, and some people may not like it... too bad... the Stalinist alternative is far worse.

Where is the line? Wilders case reveals it is not just a fine line... it is absurdly sensitive.

The slope is icy slippery, and proof of this is having a court case against someone who says... "...more Moroccans or fewer..."

And the following? From across the border? Using The Wilders Standard, these float creators should be behind bars.

Kölle!!! Kölle!!! Kölle!!!

Da simmer dabei! Dat es prima! VIVA COLONIA!

Not my country and at carnaval almost all things are allowed because they are usually satire.

 

[Grant]

Not my country and at carnaval almost all things are allowed because they are usually satire.

So if Wilders had said, "I'd like to satirically ask if you want more or fewer Moroccans in the Netherlands" he wouldn't have been charged.

I think there may be a loophole in this case. Plead satire.

 

[joG]

No, the constitution also regulates the way companies and citizens have to deal with each other, it is not just how the government deals with the citizens. Just like it is illegal for the government to discriminate it is also illegal for people and companies to discriminate.

And again, people who get prosecuted do not get prosecuted under the constitution but under criminal law.

Not really. A constitution is written to regulate the way the state should function, what it shall be allowed to do, what is disallowed and its principles. What is true is that secondary law is thought to be developed from the principles described in the constitution. There has been a discussion about the applicability of constitutional law to the behavior of citizens amongst themselves. But the literature i have read it seemed to be generally accepted that the aplication is not direct, but requires secondary law.

In this case it would seem almost impermissible for the government to pass the secondary law putting a gag on free expression of political opinion on citizens.

 

[Grant]

Not really. A constitution is written to regulate the way the state should function, what it shall be allowed to do, what is disallowed and its principles. What is true is that secondary law is thought to be developed from the principles described in the constitution. There has been a discussion about the applicability of constitutional law to the behavior of citizens amongst themselves. But the literature i have read it seemed to be generally accepted that the aplication is not direct, but requires secondary law.

In this case it would seem almost impermissible for the government to pass the secondary law putting a gag on free expression of political opinion on citizens.

Ronald Reagan, as usual, summed it up well, and you can see the contrasting philosophy with that of The Netherlands.

Almost all the world's constitutions are documents in which governments tell the people what their privileges are. Our Constitution is a document in which 'We the People' tell the government what it is allowed to do.

 

[Red_Dave]

Problem is, those on the right are tolerant... and having been at the receiving end of all manner of BS... we know the only way to convert those lost... is via free speech.

The hemophiliacs called Socialists, and others like them... Islamofascists (they're not that far apart)... well... there is a reason they want speech to be regulated. It's yet another weapon in their arsenal to club those who don't toe-the-line. Look at what the Obama administration looked at with those who believe Global Warming is a massive and perverted hoax.

Steyn... the guy is brilliant.

A rally in Madrid this month protested the arrests of two puppeteers accused of glorifying terrorism and promoting hatred. The puppeteers could face up to seven years in prison. Credit Fernando Alvarado/European Pressphoto Agency

(SICK... but that's Europe, and that's what the Socialists in Amerika want to bring here).

You are aware that Spain has a concervative government are you not?

 

[zimmer]

You are aware that Spain has a concervative government are you not?

An outlier... the exception that proves the rule.

Wait until Trump wins it all... and you'll see the loonies out in the street in full force again. With 7-years of doing nothing... they're itching to let their freak flags fly.

You'll think Trump had committed crimes on par with the Islamic terrorist machine.

 

[zimmer]

Not my country and at carnaval almost all things are allowed because they are usually satire.

Ich weiss... und hab es gesagt... VIVA COLONIA!!!

Oh... once again... exceptions for the privileged few! How nice, and how does one join that club?

Satire or not... they are mocking Muslims. Is mocking Muslims not allowed in The Netherlands?

"...more Moroccans or fewer..."

Allowed at Debatepolitics, but not in the tolerant, free speech loving Netherlands.

What is the line for free speech in The Netherlands? Does anyone really know? NO! It's a perverse sliding scale, but one ****ing great weapon to attack those who do not conform to GroupThink, and the latest in the evolving standards of an über-sensitive society.

 

[Grant]

Ich weiss... und hab es gesagt... VIVA COLONIA!!! Oh... once again... exceptions for the privileged few! How nice, and how does one join that club? Satire or not... they are mocking Muslims. Is mocking Muslims not allowed in The Netherlands? "...more Moroccans or fewer..." Allowed at Debatepolitics, but not in the tolerant, free speech loving Netherlands.What is the line for free speech in The Netherlands? Does anyone really know? NO! It's a perverse sliding scale, but one ****ing great weapon to attack those who do not conform to GroupThink.

here's an interesting article from 2003 re Satire in the Netherlands. Especially poignant is the part about Theo van Gogh, stabbed and murdered because of his 'satire'. What is UnDutchable?: Dutch Humor, Political Correctness, and Discursive Taboo by Anna-Sterre Nette | Humanity in Action

The Dutch have learned their lesson. They'll stay silent and gradually disappear.

 

[Red_Dave]

An outlier... the exception that proves the rule.

Wait until Trump wins it all... and you'll see the loonies out in the street in full force again. With 7-years of doing nothing... they're itching to let their freak flags fly.

You'll think Trump had committed crimes on par with the Islamic terrorist machine.

The Uk? Hungary? Poland?

 

[PeteEU]

Nice try... and no revision...

I'd never heard of any such thing (remember... freedom of speech enshrined in 1791) but go google... book burning southern states USA... no results. Now National Socialists burned books, Jews and art they deemed unfit. Those tolerant Leftists.

Book BANNINGS... not burnings. Nice try to deflect.

 

[Renae]

No, the laws where made by the people by voting in the members of parliament who they trusted to make the rules and constitution.

And I think it enforces the strengths of democracy that it is not only freedom but it is also about respect, honoring and civil/human rights.

Then
"I may not like what you have to say, but I shall fight to the death for your right to say it!"
Now"
"Government should really control speech that might be mean, or might not be nice, really it's best to let Government make decisions on what's a good speech."

We are so ****ed.

 

[Grant]

Then
"I may not like what you have to say, but I shall fight to the death for your right to say it!"
Now"
"Government should really control speech that might be mean, or might not be nice, really it's best to let Government make decisions on what's a good speech." We are so ****ed.

And they're doubly ****ed because they think making free speech illegal will make the problems go away.

 

[Grant]

Book BANNINGS... not burnings. Nice try to deflect.

After trying to deflect the conversation away from the Netherlands of today to the Mississippi of yesteryear. You don't seem to reflect on the real issues much, do you?

 

[PeteEU]

After trying to deflect the conversation away from the Netherlands of today to the Mississippi of yesteryear. You don't seem to reflect on the real issues much, do you?

No I am saying that this **** happens in all religions and all over the world, something it seems you are in denial off in your Muslim hate haze.

 

[Grant]

No I am saying that this **** happens in all religions and all over the world, something it seems you are in denial off in your Muslim hate haze.

Yes, it might well have happened in all religions all over the world but in trying to deal with today's world this is where we should focus. Being an apologist for rapists, and never their victims, sets you apart from most real men but your attitude is not that uncommon in the Europe of today. Perhaps that's why your focus is on the America of a century ago instead.

 

[Gaztopian]

Then argue your point. Allowing the state in breach of the local constitution to take sides and suppress citizens' expression of their opinions causes severe damage to democracy on a number of levels. It is a very dumb people that allows its democratic system to be subverted in that way.

On the contrary: only a judicious and blessed polity ensures its survival and prolongs its happiness by admitting that in a social arrangement, a boundless liberty is nothing but a self-indulgent absurdity, an idiosyncrasy of a demos that conceals anarchy and incontinence as liberty and magnificence. Proper governance is primarily concerned with the survival of the regime, without dismissing the auxiliary but still significant concern of maximizing individual happiness. First, we'll conscript the necessary resources for the regime's survival; second, we'll allot the excess to the populace.

Freedom of expression is no exception, even if the demos makes of it a fetish. The postulate that freedom of expression is an immutable right of the individual is perverse and a recipe for bad governance. Before speech is allowed, it must be scrutinized; only when its benignity is established can we sanction and protect the individual's entitlement to it.

 

[Grant]

On the contrary: only a judicious and blessed polity ensures its survival and prolongs its happiness by admitting that in a social arrangement, a boundless liberty is nothing but a self-indulgent absurdity, an idiosyncrasy of a demos that conceals anarchy and incontinence as liberty and magnificence. Proper governance is primarily concerned with the survival of the regime, without dismissing the auxiliary but still significant concern of maximizing individual happiness. First, we'll conscript the necessary resources for the regime's survival; second, we'll allot the excess to the populace.

Freedom of expression is no exception, even if the demos makes of it a fetish. The postulate that freedom of expression is an immutable right of the individual is perverse and a recipe for bad governance. Before speech is allowed, it must be scrutinized; only when its benignity is established can we sanction and protect the individual's entitlement to it.

Perhaps North Americans of this generation can begin to understand why Nazism, Communism and Fascism had their roots in Europe. We can also understand why so many people fled from there to the New World.

 

[Gaztopian]

The well-being of the State must take precedence over the rights of citizens to speak their minds because of the possibility of Fascism. It's always enlightening to read what the Centrists are thinking.

It's indeed telling that you find that argument so outlandish and perverse. To argue against the postulate that speech can undermine the state's well-being is your prerogative, but to come out and lampoon the primacy of the state's well-being seeps of asininity.

. In fact it is and is undergoing that transformation now. After a brief drunken fling with multiculturalism Europeans have awoken to a growing monotheism snoring in the bed beside them. How do you get this beast out of the privacy of your home and have your own comfy bed back again? Sorry, but you can't.

Your lively description of European multiculturalism is fear-mongering resulting from either ignorance or prejudices. In what way is Islam dictating public or private life in the Netherlands? What Dutch laws are based on Sharia law? Are Muslims as a demographic approaching the critical mass that would reconstitute the state's identity, whether through the ballot or otherwise?

The Dutch, and other western Europeans, decided that cradle-to-grave social programs supported by the taxes of foreign workers were preferable to maintaining a free thinking culture and a safe environment. Once a mistake of that magnitude is made it is, as the responders to Wilders question certainly understand, impossible to have your home back again.

There's nothing patriotic about the right wing's anti-immigration sentiments in Europe. Having been on the periphery of public life for long, the European right is wielding demagoguery in its pursuit for resurrection - that its opportunism has no regard for the state is the ultimate testimony of the right's treason to the state.

Nevertheless, you hit the nail on the head when you diagnosed the true malady of European societies. Europeans have nothing but their effeteness and licentiousness to blame for their inability to sustain their populations - blaming that on Muslims for being Muslims is a breakdown in causal reasoning.

Is this you, Pete? Trump is only a presidential candidate so what 'course of history' are you referring to? You could be arrested for making such a false claim.

A presidential candidate that already made tremendous damage to the American society and he's not even in the White House yet.

 

[Gaztopian]

Perhaps North Americans of this generation can begin to understand why Nazism, Communism and Fascism had their roots in Europe. We can also understand why so many people fled from there to the New World.

Considering what's already happening in the U.S and what it portends, there's so much irony and oblivion in those statements.

 

[Grant]

It's indeed telling that you find that argument so outlandish and perverse. To argue against the postulate that speech can undermine the state's well-being is your prerogative, but to come out and lampoon the primacy of the state's well-being seeps of asininity.

It deserves to be lampooned, and more. To say that a free born man cannot speak his mind, say what he thinks, is an abomination against the whole idea of being a thinking, feeling human being. Now the concern is not for the free exchange of ideas, no matter how we might disagree, but whether someones feelings may be hurt? If given the opportunity i feel quite certain you'd have me arrested for lampooning this anti human craziness.

Your lively description of European multiculturalism is fear-mongering resulting from either ignorance or prejudices. In what way is Islam dictating public or private life in the Netherlands? What Dutch laws are based on Sharia law? Are Muslims as a demographic approaching the critical mass that would reconstitute the state's identity, whether through the ballot or otherwise?

No one has any fear whatsoever from Europeans. European women and children, and Jews of course, certainly have reason to be fearful, given that they have little protection. Muslims certainly aren;t concerned about Dutch feelings. Police in Dutch city Hague asked mosque to establish Sharia patrols

There's nothing patriotic about the right wing's anti-immigration sentiments in Europe. Having been on the periphery of public life for long, the European right is wielding demagoguery in its pursuit for resurrection - that its opportunism has no regard for the state is the ultimate testimony of the right's treason to the state.

Right wing, left wing. Who really cares? The real story is the breakdown of European society and the response from Europeans is to rattle off different 'wings'. It's just hopeless.

Nevertheless, you hit the nail on the head when you diagnosed the true malady of European societies. Europeans have nothing but their effeteness and licentiousness to blame for their inability to sustain their populations - blaming that on Muslims for being Muslims is a breakdown in causal reasoning.

Gracias, but it's just a matter of pointing out the obvious.

 

[Grant]

Considering what's already happening in the U.S and what it portends, there's so much irony and oblivion in those statements.

You have some examples?