Is holland an Islamic state?

[JerrySeinfeld]

Since when was it illegal in a democratic western country to make anti-religious statements?

Apparently some Dutch dude is going to trial for making "anti Islamic" statements.

Wow.

Didn't that kind of charge used to only exist in places like saudi arabia?

God bless multiculturalism, I guess. Canada, examine europe's multi culti woes. For there lies your future.

[M.Dancer]

Ummm..great link ...ummm ...Topaz....

[DogOnPorch]

Geert Wilders...on trial for "Fitna".

-------------------------

It's a Daisy.

[KeyStone]

Since when was it illegal in a democratic western country to make anti-religious statements?

Apparently some Dutch dude is going to trial for making "anti Islamic" statements.

Wow.

Didn't that kind of charge used to only exist in places like saudi arabia?

God bless multiculturalism, I guess. Canada, examine europe's multi culti woes. For there lies your future.

Enough of your Islamophobia.

In Europe, people go to jail all the time for anti-semitic statements.

Not believing in the holocaust is a crime in several countries in Europe, for instance.

Now, whether you agree with these limits to free speech is one thing, but suggesting Holland is an Islamic state because of this is ludicrous.

Nobody asks if Germany is a Jewish state because they jail holocaust deniers.

[guyser]

but suggesting Holland is an Islamic state because of this is ludicrous.

Hell, I'm surprised Jerry could correctly spell 'Holland' .

[WIP]

Enough of your Islamophobia.

In Europe, people go to jail all the time for anti-semitic statements.

Not believing in the holocaust is a crime in several countries in Europe, for instance.

Now, whether you agree with these limits to free speech is one thing, but suggesting Holland is an Islamic state because of this is ludicrous.

Nobody asks if Germany is a Jewish state because they jail holocaust deniers.

Which is a bad comparison, since denial of a recent historical event like the Holocaust, enables Jew-baiters (like you) to deny that an historic, unprecedented injustice had been committed....since this was the first time in history that a strategy was developed and carried out to exterminate an entire ethnic and cultural group.

On the other hand, regardless of the motives and authenticity of Geert Wilder's movie "Fitna," the attempt to prosecute him is being done on the grounds that free speech does not include criticizing religions: By attacking the symbols of the Muslim religion, he also insulted Muslim believers.... In a democratic system, hate speech is considered to be so serious that it is in the general interest to ... draw a clear line.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbey...e-east-dut.html

Well, say goodbye to free speech in North America if stupid politicians are as easily intimidated by Muslim activists as they are in the Netherlands. Anti-blasphemy laws are also supported by other religions, most notably the Catholic Church, and the only way either religion will survive in the 21st Century is if they are able to entrench their power with laws that make it illegal to criticize them.

Right now, Islam is the most dangerous religion in the world because it makes it a crime for Muslims to leave the religion, a crime to criticize their beliefs, and their clergy incite angry mobs of borderline psychotic followers to take the streets and riot when they are displeased by people like Wilders, Ayan Hirsi Ali, and Danish cartoons.

[Mr.Canada]

Enough of your Islamophobia.

In Europe, people go to jail all the time for anti-semitic statements.

Not believing in the holocaust is a crime in several countries in Europe, for instance.

Now, whether you agree with these limits to free speech is one thing, but suggesting Holland is an Islamic state because of this is ludicrous.

Nobody asks if Germany is a Jewish state because they jail holocaust deniers.

So to criticize Islam and discuss it is Islamaphobia?

Truth is there are be headings in the streets of The Netherlands now in the name of Allah.

It has a population of 10% Islam, this is when the problems begin as demonstrated.

France will be next.

[Drea]

Truth is there are be headings in the streets of The Netherlands now in the name of Allah.

Link please.

Besides erradicating an entire religion (which is unfortunately impossible) ... how does one change this?

"But MY religion is good!" you lament. If Fundamental Christians had their way, and North America had no secular population, we would be ruled by the extreme Christian doctrine. Just like Iran is ruled by the extreme Muslim doctrine. The lack of a secular population allows the fundamentalists of a religin to flourish. If no one is saying "no, let's look at this another way" then there is no free thought, no freedom to not be a fundamentalist.

Personally, I feel no need for religion and can't for the life of me, understand why anyone would oppress, or other wise harm another person "in the name of" any "philosophy". It's mind boggling! Gaaawwd I despise religion and how it warps people.

[DogOnPorch]

Link please.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theo_van_Gogh_(film_director)

Shot multiple times, nearly beheaded...then gutted.

A death threat to Ayaan Hirsi Ali was pinned to his chest w/ a knife.

------------------------------------------

Radar: Hawk, Hawk...

Nurse Able: {smooching Hawkeye} Who's that??

Hawkeye: My wife. She always hawks like that.

---M*A*S*H

[KeyStone]

Which is a bad comparison, since denial of a recent historical event like the Holocaust, enables Jew-baiters (like you) to deny that an historic, unprecedented injustice had been committed....since this was the first time in history that a strategy was developed and carried out to exterminate an entire ethnic and cultural group.

Name any other historic event that can not be questioned, without risking imprisonment. Can we question World War I? Can we question evolution? The dinosaurs? Should people who don't believe in dinosaurs go to jail. Believe it or not, there are more important historic events in the history of our planet, than the the holocaust.

My point though, is to show the hyrpocrisy of those that protest protection of Islamic beliefs, while at the same time justifying laws that protect Jewish beliefs.

On the other hand, regardless of the motives and authenticity of Geert Wilder's movie "Fitna," the attempt to prosecute him is being done on the grounds that free speech does not include criticizing religions: By attacking the symbols of the Muslim religion, he also insulted Muslim believers.... In a democratic system, hate speech is considered to be so serious that it is in the general interest to ... draw a clear line.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbey...e-east-dut.html

Is it a stretch? Sure. But that's really an argument about hate speech. Where do we draw the line - regardless of whether it is directed towards Christians, Hindus, Moonies, Jews, Arabs, Persians, Chinese, gays etc. The fact that Holland has decided to invoke hate crimes laws does not mean that it is an Islamic state, any more than Canada prosecuting David Ahkanew for his anti-semitic rants makes us a Jewish state.

Well, say goodbye to free speech in North America if stupid politicians are as easily intimidated by Muslim activists as they are in the Netherlands. Anti-blasphemy laws are also supported by other religions, most notably the Catholic Church, and the only way either religion will survive in the 21st Century is if they are able to entrench their power with laws that make it illegal to criticize them.

Well, at least now you are expanding it to other religions. Good for you, it's much easier to hide your Islamophobia if you mix it in with the Catholic church etc.

Right now, Islam is the most dangerous religion in the world because it makes it a crime for Muslims to leave the religion, a crime to criticize their beliefs, and their clergy incite angry mobs of borderline psychotic followers to take the streets and riot when they are displeased by people like Wilders, Ayan Hirsi Ali, and Danish cartoons.

Well, first of all, religions don't make laws -governments make laws - so Islam doesn't make it a crime for Muslims to leave the religion. Muslim governments make it a crime - and not all Muslim governments make it a crime - some do and some don't.

Granted, Muslim followers get angrier than other religions. But, it can be avoided pretty easily.

Just don't make disrepectful cartoons about Mohammed. Ahmadinejad had his "holocaust denier conference" to prove a point.

You either allow free speech, or you make some exceptions. I don't think Jews would very much like some funny cartoons about the Holocaust.

Would they protest in the streets and break windows? No. They would try to have people arrested and charged with hate crimes. Is this better? I don't know.

[KeyStone]

So to criticize Islam and discuss it is Islamaphobia?

Truth is there are be headings in the streets of The Netherlands now in the name of Allah.

It has a population of 10% Islam, this is when the problems begin as demonstrated.

France will be next.

Well, it's a bit of a gray area. Let's look at it from the other side.

To criticize Israel is not anti-semitism, although many seem unable to tell the difference.

To criticize Judaism would not be appreciated, but perhaps would not be considered anti-semitism by those criticizing it. But the CJC probably would consider it anti-semitism.

To criticize Jews, would be considered anti-semitism.

For instance, if I made the statement:

It has a population of 10% Jews, this is when the problems begin as demonstrated, then I would be labelled an anti-semite and rightfully so.

So, while you claim to be criticizing Islam, you are actually criticizing Islamic believers, which does constitute Islamaphobia.

[DogOnPorch]

I don't think Jews would very much like some funny cartoons about the Holocaust.

There are lots of Jewish cartoonists who poke fun at Jews and the Holocaust. Art Spiegelman, for example.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_Spiegelman

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maus

http://arts-sciences.cua.edu/hsct102/carto...ages/maus1.html

Another...

http://www.evcomics.com/

Anti-Semitic cartoons can be found in many Arab newspapers that depict Jews in the same manner as cartoons from Der Stürmer.

http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/sturmer.htm

http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/ArabCartoons.htm

----------------------------------------------

It's a Daisy.

Edited January 24, 2009 by DogOnPorch

[dub]

There are lots of Jewish cartoonists who poke fun at Jews and the Holocaust. Art Spiegelman, for example.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_Spiegelman

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maus

http://arts-sciences.cua.edu/hsct102/carto...ages/maus1.html

Another...

http://www.evcomics.com/

Anti-Semitic cartoons can be found in many Arab newspapers that depict Jews in the same manner as cartoons from Der Stürmer.

http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/sturmer.htm

http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/ArabCartoons.htm

----------------------------------------------

It's a Daisy.

the same paper that ran the original muhammed cartoons refused to run the holocaust cartoons. i've seen them and even though some are anti-semite, most compare the struggle of the palestinians to the holocaust victims. originally, the paper said that they would post cartoons because they believe in freedom of speech, but then went against what they said and refused to publish them.

[dub]

i don't think the dutch MP should be punished for his islamophobe and racist views. people should have unlimited freedom of speech.

at least europe seems to be somewhat balanced and not biased against one religion. i wonder if wheeler will get the same jail time as the british historian who was put in prison in austria for denying the holocaust.

Edited January 24, 2009 by dub

[dub]

Holocaust denier Irving is jailed

British historian David Irving has been found guilty in Vienna of denying the Holocaust of European Jewry and sentenced to three years in prison.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4733820.stm

[dub]

can you believe that there are some total idiots who are calling austria a "jewish state" because it has these extreme punishments for someone making anti-semitic comments?

[DogOnPorch]

the same paper that ran the original muhammed cartoons refused to run the holocaust cartoons. i've seen them and even though some are anti-semite, most compare the struggle of the palestinians to the holocaust victims. originally, the paper said that they would post cartoons because they believe in freedom of speech, but then went against what they said and refused to publish them

Like McLeans, private publications have editorial control. Don't like it? Publish your own newspaper rather than taking folks to kangaroo courts.

As for the Gaza = Holocaust hoopla...the irony is that the Grand Mufti was an ACTUAL Nazi who's actions started all this crap way back before we were born...

-------------------------------

Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious!

Even though the sound of it Is something quite atrocious

If you say it loud enough

You'll always sound precocious

Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious!

---Mary Poppins

[dub]

Like McLeans, private publications have editorial control. Don't like it? Publish your own newspaper rather than taking folks to kangaroo courts.

As for the Gaza = Holocaust hoopla...the irony is that the Grand Mufti was an ACTUAL Nazi who's actions started all this crap way back before we were born...

-------------------------------

Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious!

Even though the sound of it Is something quite atrocious

If you say it loud enough

You'll always sound precocious

Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious!

---Mary Poppins

that's true. it is their right to publish what they want. however, they said they're not against islam and would publish the holocaust cartoons to show that this is about freedom of publication. later on, they went against what they said.

i see that you didn't respond to the comparison of the austrian anti-semitic laws to the dutch anti-islamic laws.

the difference is that in austria, the law is only for anti-semitic speech and not anything else. whereas in holland, it's an anti-hate law that would also cover jews and other religions.

but that's just too honest to say so i understand why you don't want to talk about it.

Edited January 24, 2009 by dub

[DogOnPorch]

that's true. it is their right to publish what they want. however, they said they're not against islam and would publish the holocaust cartoons. later on, they went against what they said.

i see that you didn't respond to the comparison of the austrian anti-semitic laws to the dutch anti-islamic laws.

the difference is that in austria, the law is only for anti-semitic speech and not anything else. whereas in holland, it's an anti-hate law that would also cover jews and other religions.

but that's just too honest to say so i understand why you don't want to talk about it.

Well the Western Star went out of business right after the cartoon affair, so I really don't see how he (Levant) could have published anything.

As for the laws of Holland and Austria, I don't know enough about the laws of these countries to respond...unlike you.

---------------------------------------------------------

Don't worry...be happy.

[Mr.Canada]

Well, it's a bit of a gray area. Let's look at it from the other side.

To criticize Israel is not anti-semitism, although many seem unable to tell the difference.

To criticize Judaism would not be appreciated, but perhaps would not be considered anti-semitism by those criticizing it. But the CJC probably would consider it anti-semitism.

To criticize Jews, would be considered anti-semitism.

For instance, if I made the statement:

It has a population of 10% Jews, this is when the problems begin as demonstrated, then I would be labelled an anti-semite and rightfully so.

So, while you claim to be criticizing Islam, you are actually criticizing Islamic believers, which does constitute Islamaphobia.

If it's true , it's true. No matter how uncomfortable it makes people. Just like in the US and Canada blacks sell most of the street level crack. People refuse to talk about the tough topics in the name of political correctness. Makes me sick, the western world is going in the toilet and no one seems to care.

[WIP]

Name any other historic event that can not be questioned, without risking imprisonment. Can we question World War I? Can we question evolution? The dinosaurs? Should people who don't believe in dinosaurs go to jail. Believe it or not, there are more important historic events in the history of our planet, than the the holocaust.

My point though, is to show the hyrpocrisy of those that protest protection of Islamic beliefs, while at the same time justifying laws that protect Jewish beliefs.

If it came up for a vote, I would not support any laws regarding holocaust-denial, race-baiting, and other related topics that are filed under hate speech, for the simple reason that making them illegal gives people like David Irving and Ernst Zundel, a semblance of credibility - since even casual sympathizers may conclude that their ideas must have some validity if they receive the attention of the state for promoting their theories. Also, until the Internet becomes censored by Western governments who want to control free expression, it is a place where every crazy idea can be promoted; so it is not possible to shut them down totally, like it was in the old days when we only had print and broadcast media.

The sensible approach is to provide answers and rebuttals to their misinformation, as is done with 9/11 truthers, psychic hoaxers, alternative healers, creationists and other religious frauds etc.; if people who wonder if some crazy idea they've heard on the Coasttocoast radio show might be correct, they can easily search the net for 2nd opinions next time they are online; likewise they can get refutations to Holocaust-denial claims found on Neonazi and Islamofascist websites.

Now, you allowed your mask to slip a little with an attempt to undermine the significance of the Holocaust as being merely a Jewish belief and not an historical event, since this was more than an attack on religious beliefs -- the Nazis identified Jews as a mongrel race that contaminated the purity of the blood of the German people. So, they made no distinction between Jewish rabbis and Jews who converted to the Lutheran or Catholic churches; if they were found out, they were sent to the same concentration camps.

So, you are making a false comparison to start with, by trying to equate laws against promoting Holocaust-denial with laws that will be established to make it illegal to criticize religions and religious beliefs, and it still doesn't deal with the questions: should religious beliefs be legally protected from criticism, and should we legally define people by their religious membership. An attempt to do so makes it even more difficult for people to leave or change religions.

Is it a stretch? Sure. But that's really an argument about hate speech. Where do we draw the line - regardless of whether it is directed towards Christians, Hindus, Moonies, Jews, Arabs, Persians, Chinese, gays etc. The fact that Holland has decided to invoke hate crimes laws does not mean that it is an Islamic state, any more than Canada prosecuting David Ahkanew for his anti-semitic rants makes us a Jewish state.

Yeah, that one makes you stretch armstrong alright! I never said that it made the Netherlands an Islamic state. What it has done though, is to make Islamism protected from criticism and thereby make it even more difficult for Muslims who want to leave their religion.

Well, at least now you are expanding it to other religions. Good for you, it's much easier to hide your Islamophobia if you mix it in with the Catholic church etc.

You just proved my point! Criticizing Islamic beliefs and practices is "Islamophobia." And as noted, I have spent more time criticizing the Catholic Church and other Christian sects, since they represent the majority religion where I live. In Europe, the Catholic Church, along with the Anglican Church in England, and the Lutheran Church in Germany, have shamelessly tried to piggyback on the push by Muslims to shut down criticism of religion.

Well, first of all, religions don't make laws -governments make laws - so Islam doesn't make it a crime for Muslims to leave the religion. Muslim governments make it a crime - and not all Muslim governments make it a crime - some do and some don't.

I don't have time to fact-check that last statement, but I can assure you that even if a government in a Muslim-majority nation doesn't criminalize apostasy directly, they don't stand against intimidation and killings of apostates carried out from the mosques. It is similar to the days of the Old South, when lynching wasn't legal, but lynchmobs and the organizers, were never prosecuted by the courts for murder.

As for the governments that do punish apostasy, how assinine to deny the link to the religion that exhorts its followers to hunt down and kill apostates! The governments are acting as the agents of the religion, so that's where the ultimate blame should be.

Granted, Muslim followers get angrier than other religions. But, it can be avoided pretty easily.

Just don't make disrepectful cartoons about Mohammed. Ahmadinejad had his "holocaust denier conference" to prove a point.

The strategy of appeasement is being adopted by too many people already. The threat of mob violence gets played every time something happens that they don't like. It all started 20 years ago, when, first, the British government, and then governments throughout Europe banned the Salmun Rushdie novel: "The Satanic Verses" because of the intimidation of mob violence. Ever since then, they have caved time after time on free speech issues out of fear of the adherents of this one religion.

[DogOnPorch]

I don't have time to fact-check that last statement, but I can assure you that even if a government in a Muslim-majority nation doesn't criminalize apostasy directly, they don't stand against intimidation and killings of apostates carried out from the mosques. It is similar to the days of the Old South, when lynching wasn't legal, but lynchmobs and the organizers, were never prosecuted by the courts for murder.

As for the governments that do punish apostasy, how assinine to deny the link to the religion that exhorts its followers to hunt down and kill apostates! The governments are acting as the agents of the religion, so that's where the ultimate blame should be.

An easy check.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam

--------------------------------------------

I am prepared to meet my Maker. Whether my Maker is prepared for the great ordeal of meeting me is another matter.

---Sir Winston Churchill

[dub]

Well the Western Star went out of business right after the cartoon affair, so I really don't see how he (Levant) could have published anything.

As for the laws of Holland and Austria, I don't know enough about the laws of these countries to respond...unlike you.

---------------------------------------------------------

Don't worry...be happy.

i'm talking about the danish paper who posted the original muhammed cartoons.

i'm still waiting for someone who is against wheeler in holland being charged but is okay with the laws in austria where a person is sent to prison for denying the holocaust to explain to me their stance.

[ft.niagara]

i'm talking about the danish paper who posted the original muhammed cartoons.

i'm still waiting for someone who is against wheeler in holland being charged but is okay with the laws in austria where a person is sent to prison for denying the holocaust to explain to me their stance.

You are right, I think freedom of speech should be protected to allow to comment whatever about the holocaust, or print or comment on these cartoons.

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_a...en_crescent.jpg

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_a...en_bombhead.jpg

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_a...osten_glory.jpg

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_a...sten_thumb2.jpg

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_a...ten_desert2.jpg

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_a..._cartoonist.jpg

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_a...preaching.0.jpg

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_a...schoolboy.0.jpg

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_a...ten_censor2.jpg

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_a...en_virgins2.jpg

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_a...ten_prstunt.jpg

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_a...ten_lineup2.jpg

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_a...ns/PICT1379.jpg

Edited January 25, 2009 by ft.niagara

[dub]

You are right, I think freedom of speech should be protected to allow to comment whatever about the holocaust, or print or comment on these cartoons.

useless post.

your post has nothing to do with what i said. the danish paper that originally posted the muhammed cartoons had said that they would post the holocaust cartoons in order to show that they're not against muslims and that they champion freedom of speech. however, the paper refused to do so after the holocaust cartoons were published.

if you're curious to see them, here they are: http://www.irancartoon.com/120/holocaust/

Edited January 27, 2009 by dub