“After a one-day trial in a Vienna court, British Historian David Irving was given a three-year prison sentence for ‘the crime of Holocaust denial.'” When the sentence was imposed, the Austrian prosecutor appealed because he thought “the ruling was too lenient in light of a possible sentence of up to ten years and Irvings special importance to right wing radicals…” (UK Guardian, Feb. 21, 2006)
Free speech doesn’t exist in the European Union. Killers in the U.S. can get less time than that and all Irving said was that the Holocaust never happened. A few words that were incorrect but otherwise harmless. The point is he was given hard time in prison for his speech. If this were the law in the United States, we would need enough prisons to lock up just about everybody.
Here’s the other news. If events take place as planned, then America will replace our first amendment with “Freedom of Expression” BUT with exceptions. The United States, like all other trading regions under global governance, must be harmonized with all other regions. The model is the European Union.
In 2007 the EU added “Common Criminal Provisions Against Racism and Xenophobia” to bring the appropriate punishment to citizens who use “hate speech” against others. And that punishment is harsh and the definition is broad.
In an integrated (North) America, a new, modified first amendment will bring to us this “freedom of expression with exceptions”. And it must be in accord with international law and the European Union. We will have the right to freedom of expression, but with exceptions, lots of exceptions. That means our first amendment will greatly limit what we can say, write, or print, including on the internet. Violation will bring fines or imprisonment if you utter or write anything that is hateful or the injured party thinks is hateful, even if the speech is true or the injured party doesn’t file a claim.
According “to the EU Framework Decision, criminal prosecution authorities must ex officio initiate an investigation into the offenses listed in the Framework Decision. The injured party need not file a criminal complaint.” The speech police will be monitoring what you write and say. They can arrest and and charge you with a major crime.
George W. Bush, during his term of office, is the one who led the rush for the integration of North America, integration among regions, the first being the European Union, and implementing global governance. Bush, in a joint communique from Slovenia, Europe, June 10, 2008, after discussing continued integration with the EU, said:
‘We seek a world based on international law, democracy, the rule of law and human rights, and strengthened by broad and sustainable market-based economic growth.
” We are committed to support effective multilateralism, based on a stronger and more efficient United Nations. We will work to strengthen the United Nations so that it can better fulfill the goals and objectives set forth in its mandate…”
Go to the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and scroll down to Article 19, freedom of expression and the many exceptions to it. This will be the global standard for “free speech”.
Compare the above with U.S. Constitutional protection:
“The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prevents the Congress, and by extension any public authority, from interfering in the context of communications that take place in a public forum. Racist and xenophobic propaganda are thus constitutionally protected in the U.S. as varieties of controversial political speech.”
All across the European Union there are citizens who are on trial now or in prison for their free speech. In this new world in which the regions will be integrated and harmonized, economically and politically, there will be no discord and many words and thoughts, if expressed, will be a criminal act, punishable by law.
The latest victim is Dutch legislator Geert Wilders, who was charged with “speaking out about the Islamic immigration and integration problem in the Netherlands…But after a long legal process, he was acquitted of ‘hate speech’ crimes.”
During a debate on Muslim integration and multiculturalism, Wilders said, “The core problem is the fascist Islam, the sick ideology of Allah and Mohammad as laid down in the Islamic Mein Kampf, the Quran.” (Seattle Times, June 24, 2011)
Wilders said much more concerning Islam, all true, but he has paid a high price for his right to free speech since he has to continue to be protected by a large body guard contingent to protect him from numerous death threats from the Muslim community.
(Presidents Obama and Bush have both said that Muhammad was a peaceful man and Islam is a peaceful religion. Their advisers said it was the wise thing to do. The oil, don’t you know.)
Before the verdict Wilders said Islam is “an ideology of hatred.” In his speech he noted that “All over the world we can see how freedom is fleeing from Islam. Day by day we see our freedoms dwindle.” (National Post)
“We must live in the truth, said the dissidents under Communist rule, because the truth will set us free. Truth and freedom are inextricably connected. We must speak the truth because otherwise we shall lose our freedom.”
Wilders said, after the verdict of innocent:
“I am delighted with this ruling. It is a victory not only for me but for all Dutch people. Today is a victory for freedom of speech. […] I have spoken, I speak and I shall continue to speak.”
Brigitte Bardot, a former French film star, has a history of disregarding curbs on her free speech. She was convicted for a fifth time and fined (June 3, 2008) “over her controversial remarks about Islam and its followers…The prosecutor said she was weary of charging Ms. Bardot with offences relating to racial hatred and xenophobia.” The French people would not like it if Bardot wound up in prison.
In this incident (2006) she wrote a letter to “then Interior Secretary Nicolas Sarkozy, which was later published on her website. Her statement was that she opposed “the slaughter of animals for the Muslim festival of Eid al-Adha…[and] demanded that the animals be stunned before being killed.”
And she was “tired of being led by the nose by this population that is destroying us, destroying our country by imposing its acts.”
Bardot also authored a book, ‘A Cry in the Silence,” criticizing a number of groups, especially Muslims. She wrote:
“I am against the Islamisation of France. For centuries our forefathers…our fathers gave their lives to chase all successive invaders from France.”
“For 20 years we have submitted to a dangerous and uncontrolled underground infiltration [that] tries to impose its (sharia) laws.” See Bardot.
Note: Publishing her quotes on the internet is a criminal act in Europe. Now that the United States is integrating economically and politically with the EU, efforts to harmonize our basic laws will continue to be pushed forward by President Obama or his successor, Republican or Democrat. This harmonization must also be completed with all three nations of an integrated North American Community.
More examples of citizens arrested for stating the facts:
January 2009-“Susanne Winter, an Austrian politician and Member of Parliament, was convicted for the ‘crime’ of saying that ‘in today’s system’ the Islamic Prophet Muhammad would be considered a ‘child molester,’ referring to his marriage at the age of 56 to a six-year-old girl. Winter was also convicted of ‘incitement’ for saying that Austria faces an ‘Islamic immigration tsunami.'” Winters was ordered to pay a fine of…$31,000, and received a suspended three-month prison sentence.”
She did nothing but make a couple of true statements. A world gone mad? Of course. It’s the new world bearing down on your necks. Stop it if you can.
The Netherlands again. “Gregorious Nekschot, the pseudonym of a Dutch cartoonist who is a vocal critic of Islamic female circumcision and often mocks multiculturalism, was arrested at his home in Amsterdam in May 2008 for drawing cartoons deemed offensive to Muslims…Nekschot is expected to be prosecuted for eight cartoons that ‘attribute negative qualities to certain groups of people, and, as such, are insulting and constitute the crimes of discrimination and hate according to articles 137c and 137d of the Dutch Penal Code.”
The list is endless but read a few more here, Free Speech on Trial in Europe.
Muslims constantly tell the non- Muslims that someday the world will be ruled by Islamic law (sharia) in all of its evil aspects. That includes the United States and Muslims are in the midst of doing just that. The mosque in New York will be a monument to Islam’s victory on 9/11.
And the leaders of our country are making the same mistakes as the Europeans, allowing Muslims to enter and refrain from assimilating. All religions and cultures are not the same. With multiculturalism, we will experience the horrors of the new modified freedom of speech.
A bill offered up in 2009 by Democrat Linda Sanchez of California failed. It has wording in it that could bring many thousands of criminal cases that mirror the nightmare in Europe. The bill, H.R. 1966 [111th]: Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act defines the punishment for violating this law:
‘Sec. 881 Cyberbullying
(a) Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
In the U.S. (North American Community), Muslims and Mexicans will be the first to line up and press charges in the same way the Muslims are taking advantage of the European Unions semi- free speech.
Note: It appears that some member nations of the EU are moving away from their multicultural nightmare. Just a few days before Geert Wilders was acquitted in the Netherlands, June 23, 2011, the Dutch government said it will abandon multiculturalism. Last year Angela Merkel of Germany said that multiculturalism is a failure. Read the article.
Filed under: Commentary