• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Dutch populist Geert Wilders acquitted of hate speech

Renae

Renae

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
50,241
Reaction score
19,243
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Dutch populist politician Geert Wilders was acquitted of inciting hatred of Muslims in a court ruling on Thursday that may strengthen his political influence and exacerbate tensions over immigration policy.

The case was seen by some as a test of free speech in a country which has a long tradition of tolerance and blunt talk, but where opposition to immigration, particularly from Muslim or predominantly Muslim countries, is on the rise.
Click to expand...
Dutch populist Geert Wilders acquitted of hate speech | Reuters

Score one for free speech.
 
I suspect that some of his supporters/followers found more value in him as a martyr. Too bad for them. Good for him.

Censorship sometimes has the opposite effect of what was intended. Usually better to let someone be heard as much as people want to listen.
 
MrVicchio said:
Dutch populist Geert Wilders acquitted of hate speech | Reuters

Score one for free speech.
Click to expand...

This is just the beginning as these groups are now taking their case to the hugely biased UNHRC.

Others also face free speech problems.

Basic Freedoms: A Relic of the Past | EuropeNews

Meanwhile others choose to express their disagreements without dialog. According to the article
Wilders, who has received numerous death threats and has to live under 24-hour guard, argued that he was exercising his right to freedom of speech when criticizing Islam.
Click to expand...
 
jamesrage said:
The fact they would even have laws against "hate speech" and hold a trial for "hate speech" is not a score one for free speech.
Click to expand...

Someone who gets it.

Considering our history, its sooner a disgrace.
 
Djoop said:
Someone who gets it.

Considering our history, its sooner a disgrace.
Click to expand...

The only way this would have been a score one for free speech is if these idiotic hate speech laws were thrown out.
 
jamesrage said:
The fact they would even have laws against "hate speech" and hold a trial for "hate speech" is not a score one for free speech.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry if oyu don't think that the guy winning the case is a score for free speech. It's a step in the right direction. Sheesh, some people cannot be pleased.
 
MrVicchio said:
I'm sorry if oyu don't think that the guy winning the case is a score for free speech. It's a step in the right direction. Sheesh, some people cannot be pleased.
Click to expand...

Everyone lost in this case, regardless of the result. Muslims were ill represented by idiotic lawyers who were laughed out of court. The court lost a lot of credit knowing that one of the judges tried to influence a witness. Wilders lost a lot of time, not very useful during the election last year. The Netherlands in general, famous for its tolerance, lost credit.

Moreover, this lawsuit wasn't the only disgraceful event teh last few years. Cartoonist have been arrested, plays have been banned, politicans called for a law on blasphemy days after the murder on Theo van Gogh. Journalists have been threatened, and even beat up by street thugs. It just goes on and on.
 
Djoop said:
Everyone lost in this case, regardless of the result. Muslims were ill represented by idiotic lawyers who were laughed out of court. The court lost a lot of credit knowing that one of the judges tried to influence a witness. Wilders lost a lot of time, not very useful during the election last year. The Netherlands in general, famous for its tolerance, lost credit.

Moreover, this lawsuit wasn't the only disgraceful event teh last few years. Cartoonist have been arrested, plays have been banned, politicans called for a law on blasphemy days after the murder on Theo van Gogh. Journalists have been threatened, and even beat up by street thugs. It just goes on and on.
Click to expand...

I'm fully aware of the issues surrounding the case, thought it was worthless near kangaroo court level of waste of time... and I'm glad he won. For as bad as this all was... had he been found guilty would have been far, far worse.
 
MrVicchio said:
I'm sorry if oyu don't think that the guy winning the case is a score for free speech. It's a step in the right direction. Sheesh, some people cannot be pleased.
Click to expand...

I'm among those who think the outcome of the trial was correct but the punishment for Wilders exercising his free speech is the process, just as it is here in Canada,

Wilders had to hire lawyers. or at least someone had to pay for them, and he had to risk his name and reputation and llife, all because his right to speak out was removed.

He has won it back again, however brief his victory might be ,but there is still a message sent that there are limits to what people can say, and that is dangerous. There is still a matter of the UN and what it's courts might decide. The fact that this was even brought to trial sends a chill, and that same chill is being felt throughout the western world.
 
It's probably a good thing he was acquitted, because as was said before, it would have made him a martyr and probably caused the opposite of what was intended, by strengthening his case.

He should have a right to say what he says, so it was right he was legally acquitted. But that doesn't mean what he says and does is morally acceptable. He was rightfully acquitted legally, but that doesn't acquit him morally, IMO.

To those of you Muslim-haters who condemn these laws against hate speech: You are aware that when there is no law against hate speech, you don't have much at hand legally to prosecute Muslim hate speech either, do you?
 
Good. I never really understood what was so bad about what he says or about that simplistic little movie he made a while back. I think like most populists he has very limited intellectual range, but last I checked that's not a crime.
 
German guy said:
It's probably a good thing he was acquitted, because as was said before, it would have made him a martyr and probably caused the opposite of what was intended, by strengthening his case.

He should have a right to say what he says, so it was right he was legally acquitted. But that doesn't mean what he says and does is morally acceptable. He was rightfully acquitted legally, but that doesn't acquit him morally, IMO.

To those of you Muslim-haters who condemn these laws against hate speech: You are aware that when there is no law against hate speech, you don't have much at hand legally to prosecute Muslim hate speech either, do you?
Click to expand...



I never noticed any hatred for Muslims expressed though their tendency to violence in these matters was mentioned, In fact it is the Muslims who hate, and at a far greater extreme than anything Geert Wilders had to say. If you feel Wilders said something that was inaccurate there are forums where you can disagree without having to murder anyone.

Keep in mind that is is Wilders, and many others, who are having to spend their lives under 24 hours guard, not any Muslims.
 
MrVicchio said:
I'm sorry if oyu don't think that the guy winning the case is a score for free speech. It's a step in the right direction. Sheesh, some people cannot be pleased.
Click to expand...

This case is merely a victory for Geert Wilders. Not free speech. The only way this would have been a victory for free speech or in the right directions is if those idiotic hate speech laws were struck down down. Because if someone else decided to make a film that angered a protected class or says something that angers a protected class then they would have to go through the same thing Wilders's did and possible be incarcerated or pay a huge fine.
 
German guy said:
To those of you Muslim-haters who condemn these laws against hate speech:
Click to expand...

I do not hate Muslims. Free speech also means unpopular speech. What if a man was arrested for saying Christianity is a fairy tale, for claiming creationism is a fairy tale, compared the bible to a Harry Potter Book, made a documentary against Christianity, or said Catholicism is really paganism(I say this myself all the time)?

You are aware that when there is no law against hate speech, you don't have much at hand legally to prosecute Muslim hate speech either, do you?
Click to expand...

Oh no because you said that I am now no longer against hate speech laws(sarcasm).

Has it ever occurred to you that governments can add businesses and themselves to the list of its illegal to offend groups of people? Because you can see a lot of hate in the eyes of protesters in one of those European countries any time the government wants to cut benefits. Free speech means there is no such thing as hate speech laws.
 
Grant said:
I never noticed any hatred for Muslims expressed though their tendency to violence in these matters was mentioned, In fact it is the Muslims who hate, and at a far greater extreme than anything Geert Wilders had to say. If you feel Wilders said something that was inaccurate there are forums where you can disagree without having to murder anyone.

Keep in mind that is is Wilders, and many others, who are having to spend their lives under 24 hours guard, not any Muslims.
Click to expand...

I thanked you mainly for that last sentence, which I feel is important to keep in mind. Unfortunately, I have to admit we also see a rise in violence against muslims and mosques the last few years.
 
jamesrage said:
This case is merely a victory for Geert Wilders. Not free speech. The only way this would have been a victory for free speech or in the right directions is if those idiotic hate speech laws were struck down down. Because if someone else decided to make a film that angered a protected class or says something that angers a protected class then they would have to go through the same thing Wilders's did and possible be incarcerated or pay a huge fine.
Click to expand...

That's what happened to Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff in Austria and Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn here in Canada. It is a problem facing all the democracies where the politicians, fearing potential conflicts, feel that silencing one side until the other adjusts to Western ways will solve these problems. This is not only short term thinking , it flies in the face of all that has made the the western democracies great. And of course Holland was one of those democracies which contributed so much to free thought and speech, attracting philosophers from all over Europe.

Anyone who feels they can compromise free speech, however temporarily is horribly wrong. We have seen in the past what great harms these actions might do.
 
German guy said:
You are aware that when there is no law against hate speech, you don't have much at hand legally to prosecute Muslim hate speech either, do you?
Click to expand...

The problem here isn't in the law, but in the one sided nature with which the law is applied. The European courts would be absolutely tied up with cases if Muslims were held to the same standard regarding hate speech as are native Europeans.

The double standards are glaring.
 
Djoop said:
I thanked you mainly for that last sentence, which I feel is important to keep in mind. Unfortunately, I have to admit we also see a rise in violence against muslims and mosques the last few years.
Click to expand...

I haven't heard much of that, Djoop. Most of the violence appears to be coming from one direction.

Governments don't help at all when they separate groups into categories and fail to apply laws equally. In fact they often create and contribute to the problems rather than solving them. Few politicians think long term.
 
Grant said:
I haven't heard much of that, Djoop. Most of the violence appears to be coming from one direction.
Click to expand...
Recently I read this report counting over 100 (reported) incidents in the last 2 years, and that's only in NL. No one got killed though, contrary to the other side.

Governments don't help at all when they separate groups into categories and fail to apply laws equally. In fact they often create and contribute to the problems rather than solving them. Few politicians think long term.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
 
Djoop said:
Recently I read this report counting over 100 (reported) incidents in the last 2 years, and that's only in NL. No one got killed though, contrary to the other side.

Agreed.
Click to expand...

Don't want to overly trouble you, DJoop, but what form did most of these incidents take? Were they verbal? Damaging mosques? Physical violence?
 
Gardener said:
The problem here isn't in the law, but in the one sided nature with which the law is applied. The European courts would be absolutely tied up with cases if Muslims were held to the same standard regarding hate speech as are native Europeans.

The double standards are glaring.
Click to expand...

You are joking, right? How many radical Muslim hate preachers have been arrested already? It seems to me it was at least one every month.

As I see it, there is a double standard against Muslims. Bashing Muslims and holding them all responsible for the deeds of a few among them, in a generalizing broad-brush manner, has become mainstream. Islamophobia and blatant anti-Muslim hatred are the new anti-Semitism. In many countries, it has become perfectly acceptable. Polls show numbers between 30% and 50% of the native populations are bigoted Muslim-haters. Muslims are target of racial profiling and general suspicion in the "war on terror". And that's not even mentioning every day racism. If the same discrimination was common against Jews, people would rub their eyes, but for some reason, it's perfectly acceptable when Muslims are the target.

For the record, that doesn't mean, of course, there are no problems with Muslim extremists, or backwards attitudes among Muslim immigrants. Of course there are. I just don't believe that broad-brush condemnations, incitement and discrimination are a constructive way of dealing with these problems.

As I see it, the problem with extremist islamism is minor, ridiculously minor compared to the problem of native xenophobia and anti-Muslim bigotry. Hell, Muslims haven't even founded a party in any Western country, which demands the introduction of Sharia, or anything of that kind -- while xenophobic anti-Muslim hate preachers win up to 20% in elections.
 
German guy said:
You are joking, right? How many radical Muslim hate preachers have been arrested already? It seems to me it was at least one every month.

As I see it, there is a double standard against Muslims. Bashing Muslims and holding them all responsible for the deeds of a few among them, in a generalizing broad-brush manner, has become mainstream. Islamophobia and blatant anti-Muslim hatred are the new anti-Semitism. In many countries, it has become perfectly acceptable. Polls show numbers between 30% and 50% of the native populations are bigoted Muslim-haters. Muslims are target of racial profiling and general suspicion in the "war on terror". And that's not even mentioning every day racism. If the same discrimination was common against Jews, people would rub their eyes, but for some reason, it's perfectly acceptable when Muslims are the target.

For the record, that doesn't mean, of course, there are no problems with Muslim extremists, or backwards attitudes among Muslim immigrants. Of course there are. I just don't believe that broad-brush condemnations, incitement and discrimination are a constructive way of dealing with these problems.

As I see it, the problem with extremist islamism is minor, ridiculously minor compared to the problem of native xenophobia and anti-Muslim bigotry. Hell, Muslims haven't even founded a party in any Western country, which demands the introduction of Sharia, or anything of that kind -- while xenophobic anti-Muslim hate preachers win up to 20% in elections.
Click to expand...

How ironic that you would bring up antisemitism, considering that Muslims are such practitioners of such. Reliable polls indicate antisemitic attitues approaching near universal status in many Muslim countries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom