► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘Gates of Vienna’

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff: Thoughts Before a Trial

by 1389AD ( 248 Comments › )
Filed under Censorship, Europe, Free Speech, Islamic Supremacism, Koran, Liberal Fascism, Political Correctness at January 16th, 2011 - 12:00 pm

Originally published on Gates of Vienna.

Reprinted with permission.

Gagged
The “hate speech” case against Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff is just the latest example in a series of legal persecutions against Europeans who speak out against the Islamization of their countries, their continent, and their civilization.

Before Elisabeth came Lionheart, Tomashot, Jussi Halla-aho, Dahn Pettersson, Gregorius Nekschot, Paul Belien, Bart Debie, Geert Wilders, and Jesper Langballe. More are coming up soon: Lars Hedegaard will go on trial January 24 for talking about the high incidence of family rape among Muslim immigrants in Denmark. Geert Wilders will face trial (again) on February 7 for his many statements about Islam and Islamization. At some point in the future, Tommy Robinson, Guramit Singh, and other members of the EDL will appear in court for their statements about Islam.

Outside of Europe, we have seen Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant hounded repeatedly in Canada. Similar cases have been brought in Australia. In Dearborn, Michigan, several Christians were arrested and charged for handing out religious tracts on a sidewalk in a Muslim neighborhood.

The list goes on and on — there are many more than I can possibly specify here — and all of the victims have one thing in common: they were charged in a court of law for criticizing Islam. Not for violent acts. Not for inciting others to violence or rebellion. Not for intimidation or threatening violence against any individual or group.

No, they simply told the truth about Islam and the Koran, and stated their opinions about Islamization. Saying such things is now a crime in virtually the entire Western world.

On Tuesday, January 18 — just four days from now — Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff will go on trial in Vienna for “hate speech”. She has written a brief essay for Gates of Vienna about what she is experiencing now, and what is facing her next week.

ESW Copenhagen Nov. 2010
(photo ©Snaphanen)
Thoughts Before a Trial
by Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

With just a few days remaining before the next stage of my trial, I had two interesting encounters with two quite different friends. Both kept me thinking very hard even after we parted ways.

Allison is the mother of twin girls who went to kindergarten with my daughter. Allison and her husband are liberals in the sense of “live and let live”; they have no connection with religion, any religion, and they believe that everyone should have the freedom to believe in whatever he wants, to dress in any way he wants, to eat whatever he wants. We have had many a discussion about what I do and what I believe in, and although we are friends, they have always told me that they think that what I do is wrong in the sense that I am unfairly attacking Muslims.

Allison called me the other night. We talked, and when I told her that I was sad that she and her husband had chosen the United Arab Emirates for their next vacation, she answered that I am a radical. I asked, somewhat surprised, why she thought that.

“Well, I see the hatred in your face when you see a woman in a headscarf on the street.”

“What?” I answered. “How can you tell? Can you read my mind?”

In any case, I do not hate people, but I criticize the ideology that forces women to cover up, that takes away a woman’s right to choose her life and her destiny, an ideology that enslaves women. I inform people about the contents of the Quran and am thus a hate preacher. Or, in other words, by teaching the Quran I am preaching hate. And people listening to me will feel hatred.

“But you also hate the woman, I can see that,” she replied.

I then told her the following: “Allison, once again: how do you know that? Can you read my thoughts? Furthermore, your belief in ‘live and let live’ can only work if everyone adheres to it. But Islam does not call for ‘live and let live’. In any case, you are actually saying what the prosecutor is saying, that this woman hates Muslims, hates Islam, incites other people to hate Muslims by feeling hatred towards Muslims. You should be hoping for a guilty verdict, because you believe you know what I feel.”

She was shocked. Apparently I had nailed her. “No, not at all. I want to you to win, with all my heart. You need to win.”

“But you’re saying something very different, Allison.”

“Well, actually I want you to win for your daughter’s sake.”

Note that she didn’t say: I want you to win because you’re right. Or: You have the right to your opinions, even though I may not agree with them. No, she said: For your daughter’s sake.

“I want you to win because your daughter should not have to deal with a mother who was found guilty in court. She won’t understand it.”

We then decided to change the subject, but afterwards the conversation continued to linger in my mind. What had happened here? Was I wrong? And still, I can only repeat myself for the umpteenth time that I do not hate Muslims (as a matter of fact, I do not hate, period), but liberals do not believe people like me. No matter what I say or do, it seems they are projecting their own bigotries upon me. I am merely holding up a mirror. What they see is not my — non-existent — hatred, but their own.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
The next day I met my neighbor and friend Samantha. During our neighborly small talk I told her that I was busy preparing for my case, and this prompted her to say in a near-whisper, “You know, I have been following your case, and though I wasn’t always so sure about what you stood for I can tell you now that I think you’re spot on. I admire you. I do not have the courage to do what you are doing, but you are doing the right thing. I also tell my friends that I think you are right and you need to be supported. They criticized you heavily before, but they are also starting to understand.”

Not only did Samantha’s words move me to tears, but I was amazed at her honesty in admitting that she had actually studied my words and found them to be the truth. And this is what I hope the court will also conclude after careful study of my arguments. One may not agree with my statements, but they are still true. No matter how painful the truth may be, it must remain what it is: the truth.


Visit the Save Free Speech for the latest on Elisabeth’s case and related matters.

Previous GoV posts about the hate speech case against Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff:

2009 Dec 5 Fighting a Hate Speech Charge in Austria
11 Heckling the Counterjihad
14 Whose Law?
17 Defaming the Muslims of Pinkafeld
2010 Mar 11 A Mother and an Activist
20 An Austrian “Hate School”
22 Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff at the Freedom Defense Initiative
29 Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff and the Wiener Akademikerbund
Sep 9 “Islam is a Political Ideology Disguised as a Religion”
16 “Justice Must Not Be Made the Handmaiden of Sharia”
17 The Truth Does Not Matter
Oct 11 Interview With Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff
16 Is the Truth Illegal in Austria?
20 A Court Date for Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff
21 BPE Press Release on Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff
22 Elisabeth’s Voice: An Appeal
23 Elisabeth’s Voice: A Follow-Up
24 Raising Our Voices
25 Elisabeth’s Voice is Growing
27 Elisabeth’s Voice: More Information
27 A Bit More Media Attention?
28 We Are Elisabeth’s Voice
30 Elisabeth’s Voice in Amsterdam
31 Mark Steyn Joins Elisabeth’s Voice
Nov 2 Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff: Target of Western Shariah
6 Anatomy of a Discussion with a Leftist Journalist
8 ESW in the WSJ
10 “The Left is Very Much the New Far Right”
11 Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff Versus the State of Denial
17 Elisabeth’s Voice: An Update
15 The New English Review Interviews Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff
20 Live-Blogging the Trial of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff
20 The ESW Defense File
23 The Trial of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, Day 1
27 The Time That is Given Us
28 ESW at Trykkefrihedsselskabet
Dec 5 An Oasis of Civilization in a Desert of Barbarism
22 An Unusual Hobby
23 In Demand Everywhere

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Censorship, Europe, Free Speech, Islamic Supremacism, Koran, Liberal Fascism, Political Correctness | 248 Comments »

Shariah in Victoria

by 1389AD ( 157 Comments › )
Filed under Australia, Islam, Islamic Supremacism, Multiculturalism, Political Correctness, Sharia (Islamic Law) at December 30th, 2010 - 2:00 pm

Satellite map of Australia

Originally published on Gates of Vienna.
Reprinted with permission.

Opposing shariah (Islamic law) is more effective than campaigning against Islam, which is, after all, a religion, and therefore out-of-bounds under most Western constitutions. The move to ban shariah is what recent initiatives in Oklahoma, Tennessee, and other American states have been about.

The situation is different in Australia. The state of Victoria has already allowed the shariah camel’s nose under the tent by providing for the application of foreign law in its Charter of Human Rights. Many thanks to the Australian tipster who sent this op-ed from The Australian:

Charter opens door to Sharia law recognition

THE issue of Sharia law and human rights is rippling around the world.

In the US state of Oklahoma, voters recently approved a proposal that forbids state courts from considering or using international laws, as well as Sharia, or Islamic law.

A US federal judge has suspended the certification of that change to the law because it might breach the constitutional rights of individual Muslims.

In Victoria, the Charter of Human Rights actually permits the use of international laws and judgments in applying the charter.

Section 14 of that charter provides for freedom of religion. The issue then arises, does this mean that Muslims are entitled to have Shariah law applied to them in the Victorian courts?

Obviously, Islam is a religion. Less obvious, but more important is that, unlike Christianity, Islam is a complete religion governing every aspect of the believer’s life, including law.

Shariah law is actually an integral part of the Islamic religious belief and, under the charter, must be protected and applied. Section 32(2) of the charter throws more light on the issue.

That subsection states: “International law and the judgments of domestic, foreign and international courts and tribunals relevant to a human right may be considered in interpreting a statutory provision.”

It is important to understand that there are “courts and tribunals” applying Shariah law to the 1.6 billion Muslims in the Muslim world.

In addition to that, the Islamic world has its own Human Rights Covenants — the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, 1990, which is intended to “serve as a general guidance for member states in the field of human rights”.

In the Cairo Declaration, it is made clear that all human rights derive from the Koran.

For example: “There shall be no crime or punishment except as provided for in the Shariah” (Article 19(d)); “All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this declaration are subject to the Islamic Shariah” (Article 24); and “The Islamic Shariah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration” (Article 25).

These human rights must be fully respected. Australian Muslims deserve no less.

Decisions on Islamic human rights must be relevant in deciding whether Shariah law is applicable in Victoria.

Quite obviously, those Islamic decisions powerfully state that Shariah law must be applied. The Victorian courts must consider these decisions under the charter, thus it makes it very likely that, at some stage in the future, Shariah law will be applied.

Further, there is precedent in Victoria through courts that are for the exclusive use of a minority group, in this instance Aborigines (known in Victoria as Kooris).

As a matter of principle, there is no difference between special courts that are racially defined (Koori courts) to those which are religiously defined (Shariah courts).

In fact, the Muslims have a much stronger case because their devoutly held beliefs actually include a legal system (Shariah).

It is this sort of process that the Oklahoma citizens voted against. In Victoria it is too late.

Peter Faris, QC, is a Melbourne barrister and media commentator

(Posted by Baron Bodissey at 12/02/2010 11:46:00 PM.)

Tags: , ,
Posted in Australia, Islam, Islamic Supremacism, Multiculturalism, Political Correctness, Sharia (Islamic Law) | 157 Comments »

‘Grand Turkey’ and the Framework Decision

by 1389AD ( 90 Comments › )
Filed under Dhimmitude, Europe, Free Speech, Islamists, Political Correctness, Turkey at November 24th, 2010 - 2:00 pm

Originally posted on Gates of Vienna

Reprinted with permission.

Those of us who man the watchtowers against the Islamic advance spend a lot of time training our binoculars on Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Pakistan. It’s at least as important, however, to keep an eye on Turkey. The current AKP regime in Ankara combines traditional Turkish nationalism of the Ataturk variety with a newly resurgent fundamentalist Islam, so that Turkish national assertiveness has taken on the aspect of a neo-Ottoman jihad.

After reading my my post about Turkey the other night, our Flemish correspondent VH was prompted to send a follow-up report that ties Turkey’s new muscle in the Council of Europe to the implementation of the EU’s notorious Framework Decision, whose deadline is coming up in less than two weeks.


“Grand Turkey” and the Framework Decision
by VH

The “Grand Turkey” speech by Recep Tayyip Erdogan last year was a between-the-lines look at what the Turks are up to:

We have said that for small political interests such as parties, votes and elections one should not hinder the progress of this country. We said that the vision of Grand Turkey is above all the party politics. That is why we said Turkey should think big and aim high. Regardless of one’s political views, a big and powerful Turkey means a more spacious, livable and bigger Turkey for everyone. There is room for everyone in this Grand Turkey. Our people of Grand Turkey possess grand heart and vision. Grand Turkey is a source of stability and peace in its region. It is a country, which gives confidence rather than giving discomfort and it empathizes rather than imposing.

While all of this is going on, consider the following seemingly unrelated fact: on November 28 the door will close on the EU “Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA”[1], which in a very serious way will stifle free speech in the EU. It equates race with religion, and extends the jurisdiction of a member state on this matter across the borders of a member state: a citizen of member state A is punishable in member state A and/or B for “offenses” committed in member state B, including activities on the internet (see Article 9.1b and 9.2b). This may occur even when nobody files a complaint (see Article 8).

As you will see, this is an obvious stratagem to criminalize criticism of Islam, in line with the OIC’s oft-proposed resolution against “defamation of religions” at the UN.

From the legislative summary of the Framework Decision (emphasis added):

“Racist and xenophobic behaviour must constitute an offence in all Member States and must be punishable by effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties of a maximum of at least one to three years of imprisonment.”

[…]

Certain forms of conduct as outlined below, which are committed for a racist or xenophobic purpose, are punishable as criminal offences:

  • public incitement to violence or hatred directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined on the basis of race, colour, descent, religion or belief, or national or ethnic origin;

[…]

From the “Framework” (pdf)[1]:

Member States shall take the necessary measures to comply with the provisions of this Framework Decision by 28 November 2010.

Notes:

[1] A few more quotes from that “Framework” (pdf), with the more interesting parts bolded:

Article 1

Offences concerning racism and xenophobia

1.   ensure that the following intentional conduct is punishable:
    Each Member State shall take the measures necessary to
    (a)   publicly inciting to violence or hatred directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin;
    (b)   the commission of an act referred to in point (a) by public dissemination or distribution of tracts, pictures or other material;
    […]
3.   For the purpose of paragraph 1, the reference to religion is intended to cover, at least, conduct which is a pretext for directing acts against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin.

—————

Article 8

Initiation of investigation or prosecution

    Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that investigations into or prosecution of the conduct referred to in Articles 1 and 2 shall not be dependent on a report or an accusation made by a victim of the conduct, at least in the most serious cases where the conduct has been committed in its territory.

—————

Article 9

Jurisdiction

1.   Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to establish its jurisdiction with regard to the conduct referred to in Articles 1 and 2 where the conduct has been committed:
    (a)   in whole or in part within its territory;
    (b)   by one of its nationals; or
    (c)   for the benefit of a legal person that has its head office in the territory of that Member State.
2.   When establishing jurisdiction in accordance with paragraph 1(a), each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that its jurisdiction extends to cases where the conduct is committed through an information system and:
    (a)   the offender commits the conduct when physically present in its territory, whether or not the conduct involves material hosted on an information system in its territory;
    (b)   the conduct involves material hosted on an information system in its territory, whether or not the offender commits the conduct when physically present in its territory.

—————

Article 10

Implementation and review

1.   Member States shall take the necessary measures to comply with the provisions of this Framework Decision by 28 November 2010.

Contributor 1389AD suggests:

If you aren’t visiting Gates of Vienna every day, you’re missing a great deal of counterjihad news.

Alternatively, you can copy and paste the GOV feed link http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default into your favorite blog feed reader.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Dhimmitude, Europe, Free Speech, Islamists, Political Correctness, Turkey | 90 Comments »

Elisabeth’s Voice: An Update

by 1389AD ( 73 Comments › )
Filed under Censorship, Europe, Free Speech, Hate Speech, Islam, Koran at November 19th, 2010 - 8:30 am

Reposted with permission from Gates of Vienna

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff at ACT! For America 1
One week from today Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff will go on trial in Vienna for “hate speech” — or, more precisely, for “denigrating religious teachings” — in a lecture she gave as part of one of her informational seminars about Islam.

Criminal procedure in Austria does not allow her or her attorney advance access to the tape of her seminar that was recorded by NEWS ( the Austrian newspaper which publicized her seminar, and which prepared the transcript which will being used against her in court). As a result, the entire tape will have to be played during the court session, which means that the proceedings may take more than one day.

Elisabeth is using the seminar transcript to prepare a point-by-point rebuttal of the charges filed against her. She will demonstrate that her statements represent an accurate account of sharia as established through a consensus of the scholars of Islamic law. Reliance of the Traveller by al-Misri, the most authoritative treatise in the Shafi’ite School of Islamic Law, will be one of her primary sources.

Elisabeth's Voice (small)Elisabeth’s Voice, the international initiative to provide funding for Elisabeth’s legal defense, has been an enormous success. Depending on how many days the trial takes, and how many levels of appeals will be necessary, she may now have enough in her fund to cover most of her legal costs.

To all those who contributed: we owe you an enormous debt of gratitude for your willingness to help Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff fight for the cause of free speech in Europe.

The list of participants in Elisabeth’s Voice has grown so long that I have put it below the jump. I included every link I could find, but I know I must have missed some. If your blog is not on the list, and you publicized Elisabeth’s case (including a link to her defense fund website), please send us an email so that you can be added to the roll of participants.

Elisabeth’s Voice:


Readers who wish to donate to Elisabeth’s defense fund should visit the Save Free Speech site. The defense fund is not under her control, and disbursements from it will be made solely to pay her legal fees.

International payments:

Raiffeisen Zentralbank Österreich
IBAN: AT513150042908021602
BIC: RZBAATWW

Made out to: Public Notary Mag. Martin Scheichenbauer, Hemmaweg 5, A-9342 Gurk


Previous posts about the hate speech case against Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff:

2009   Dec   5   Fighting a Hate Speech Charge in Austria
        11   Heckling the Counterjihad
        14   Whose Law?
        17   Defaming the Muslims of Pinkafeld
2010   Mar   11   A Mother and an Activist
        20   An Austrian “Hate School”
        22   Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff at the Freedom Defense Initiative
        29   Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff and the Wiener Akademikerbund
    Sep   9   “Islam is a Political Ideology Disguised as a Religion”
        16   “Justice Must Not Be Made the Handmaiden of Sharia”
        17   The Truth Does Not Matter
    Oct   11   Interview With Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff
        16   Is the Truth Illegal in Austria?
        20   A Court Date for Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff
        21   BPE Press Release on Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff
        22   Elisabeth’s Voice: An Appeal
        23   Elisabeth’s Voice: A Follow-Up
        24   Raising Our Voices
        25   Elisabeth’s Voice is Growing
        27   Elisabeth’s Voice: More Information
        27   A Bit More Media Attention?
        28   We Are Elisabeth’s Voice
        30   Elisabeth’s Voice in Amsterdam
        31   Mark Steyn Joins Elisabeth’s Voice
    Nov   2   Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff: Target of Western Shariah
        6   Anatomy of a Discussion with a Leftist Journalist
        8   ESW in the WSJ
        10   “The Left is Very Much the New Far Right”
        11   Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff Versus the State of Denial

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Censorship, Europe, Free Speech, Hate Speech, Islam, Koran | 73 Comments »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »