Below is a video recording of her speech, followed by a very interesting question and answer session. One of the more intriguing questions is raised by the Dutch author Arthur Legger, who suggests that it is time for an international pooling of legal talent — a Europe-wide consortium of lawyers — to fight the EU’s “hate speech” laws.
Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for uploading this video. The sound is a bit peculiar, because it has been adjusted to filter out the background noise. Vlad says he is working to improve it:
The text of Elisabeth’s speech is here. The video above departs only slightly from the prepared text, but the Q&A is obviously not included at all.
Previous posts about the hate speech case against Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff:
5 comments:
Another canary in the mine for freedom of speech.
So few seem to be aware of what Elisabeth is being put through. And, yet, her case is of such importance!
The only reason that Muslims are allowed into western countries is because almost all westerners have not read the Quran.
Hopefully the work that Elisabeth is doing will help educate the mostly clueless Americans and Europeans.
Ms Wolff's command of English is excellent. She should be doing a speaking tour here in the U.S. and probably will after she beats these sitz charges.
Would the English let her into England?
Brava, Elisabeth! Brava! We kufr are all more than fortunate to have someone so eloquent and well-versed speaking upon our behalf.
Your use of the word "despicable" was spot on!
This is from the EU Constitution:
"ARTICLE II-70
Freedom of thought, conscience and religion
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right includes freedom to change religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or in private, to manifest religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance."
"ARTICLE II-71
Freedom of expression and information
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers."
Perhaps the principle of abrogation applies, or perhaps the word "everyone" has a different meaning there.
Post a Comment