Monday, December 13, 2010

Mea Culpa!

Denmark is the home of the infamous Mohammed Cartoons, so most people assume it is a haven of free speech. It’s true that Denmark is more tolerant of politically incorrect expression than most of the rest of Europe, but it has laws against “hate speech” on its books, and sometimes they are enforced.

For example, Lars Hedegaard will go on trial early next year for his remarks about Muslims.

Then there’s Jesper Langballe, who pleaded guilty to “hate speech” a few days ago in a Danish court. Lars Hedegaard of Trykkefrihedsselskabet (the Danish Free Press Society) sends this translation of an article at Sappho.dk about the Langballe.


I Confess

Danish MP Jesper Langballe pleads guilty of hate speech after being denied the right to prove his case

Jesper LangballeOn December 3, 2010 the municipal court in Randers, Denmark found the Danish Member of Parliament Jesper Langballe (Danish People’s Party) guilty of hate speech under Article 266b of the Danish penal code. In accordance with Danish legal precedent he was denied the opportunity to prove his allegation that honour killings and sexual abuse take place in Muslim families. Under Danish jurisprudence it is immaterial whether a statement is true or untrue. All that is needed for a conviction is that somebody feels offended. “With this article in the penal code,” commented Mr. Langballe, “I must be assumed convicted in advance. I have no intention of participating in this circus. Therefore I confess.”

Mr. Langballe was sentenced to a fine of DKK 5,000 (approximately $1000) or ten days in jail.

Here is a translation of Jesper Langballe’s full confession in court.

Here at the start of my trial I wish to make a statement that will probably allow us to get home early. My message is that I confess. I plead guilty. And I wish to state my reasons.

I have already expressed my regret that the tone of the newspaper piece that has lead to me being charged was too rash and sarcastic. It did not do justice to the deeply serious issue I addressed, i.e. the terrible honour killings that take place in some Muslim families where a young girl is being murdered by her father or brother because she has fallen in love with the “wrong” man. In Denmark there is an average of approximately one honour killing per year. In Turkey there is an average of one a day according to the Turkish authorities’ statistics.

In addition I have spoken about fathers who look the other way while uncles or cousins rape their daughters. That is a well attested fact. Suffice it to refer to Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s descriptions and here in Denmark to Kristina Aamund’s touching book Mødom på mode (Virginity in vogue) about young people in Muslim families.

That was the factual basis for the passage in my comment in Berlingske Tidende (a Copenhagen daily, ed.). As I am not a lawyer, I had been looking forward to an opportunity to prove my words and thus to shed light over the substance of my remarks — the horrific honour killings. That was why I — as opposed to the rest of my parliamentary group — voted in favour of lifting my immunity as a parliamentarian in order that the trial might go forward.

I have since learned that according to current legal usage defendants in cases brought under Article 266b are denied the right to prove their case. With this article in the penal code I must be assumed convicted in advance. I have no intention to participate in this circus. Therefore I confess. This will also ensure agreement between the verdict I shall be handed in a few moments and the unbecoming article in the penal code according to which I am convicted.

In addition I am facing a libel suit for the statements I am tried for today. And in a libel suit I shall have the opportunity to prove my words. Article 266b’s sole criterion of culpability, however, is whether someone feels offended or insulted — not whether what I have said is true or false. This must be said to be in full accordance with the general “culture of offence” that has taken root and which is so magnificently supported by Article 266b. In certain circles is has almost become a hobby to feel offended — by caricatures in a newspaper, by criticism of religion, etc. etc.

Let my finally address the accusation that I have generalised — to the effect that my remarks might be seen to encompass every Muslim. That is a meaningless interpretation. The mentioning of honour killings in my text refers to the passage that “there are Muslim fathers who …” And the words “there are” can never express a totality but must always mean a subset. Let us assume — as a counter test — that I had written the opposite: “There are no Muslim fathers [who kill their daughters].” Any reasonably knowledgeable person would recognise this as a flagrant untruth.

To sum up: In the clear light of hindsight I do not like the tone in that passage. The truth of it, however, I stand by it completely. And frankly, personally I find the case itself — those gruesome murders of innocent young girls — a good deal more relevant that the question of my failing stylistic abilities.

§ 266b of the Danish penal code

“Whoever publicly or with the intent of public dissemination issues a pronouncement or other communication by which a group of persons are threatened, insulted or denigrated due to their race, skin colour, national or ethnic origin, religion or sexual orientation is liable to a fine or incarceration for up to two years.

Here is what Jesper Langballe wrote

“Of course Lars Hedegaard should not have said that there are Muslim fathers who rape their daughters when the truth appears to be that they make do with killing their daughters (the so-called honour killings) and leave it to their uncles to rape them.”

Note: President of The Free Press Society Lars Hedegaard is facing criminal trial followed by a libel suit for remarks he made in December 2009. The criminal trial takes place in Frederiksberg Court on January 24, 2011.

17 comments:

imnokuffar said...

Absolutely disgusting. I feel offended to my core by this. Perhaps I could lodge a complaint ?

Anonymous said...

Spectacular incision!! (All of it.)

I loved this:

"...the accusation that I have generalised ... Let us assume ... the opposite: “There are no Muslim fathers [who kill their daughters].” Any reasonably knowledgeable person would recognise this as a flagrant untruth.

gsw said...

"Under Danish jurisprudence it is immaterial whether a statement is true or untrue. All that is needed for a conviction is that somebody feels offended"

Then why aren't all those Danish women being offended by the comments of the imams and the mohammeden boys in schools?

Or must the statement be public/printed?

Michael Servetus said...

So then are Muslims offended by their own practices? Since it is offensive to mention what Muslims do and believe in effect.

Well how are non Muslims to feel about all of this if not offended? Tape a few sermons in a mosque and you are sure to be able to find offensive material according to race or culture or religion.

Lastly according to the law as written above it seems technically speaking that his words weren't covered under its reach. The law states as follows:

"Whoever publicly or with the intent of public dissemination issues a pronouncement or other communication by which a group of persons are threatened, insulted or denigrated due to their race, skin colour, national or ethnic origin, religion or sexual orientation is liable to a fine or incarceration for up to two years."

The emphasis of the observation and criticism is not found in race, skin color, religion, or sexual orientation but in behavior and whoever engages in that behavior. It follows that anyone who engages in any behavior of life must involve as a consequence their skin and other accidental qualities associated with their person attached to them, such as their identity. We can't just have skin behaving a certain way.

fahad said...

turkey in a new direction

fahad said...

You simply cannot hurt 1.57 billion muslims of the world.Hating prophets is a serious sin in islam.Jesus,moses,Muhammad(peace be upon them all)are great people.They should not be the target of freedom of expression.
politics of turkey

Zenster said...

fahad: You simply cannot hurt 1.57 billion muslims of the world.

A few incidents of nuclear terrorism could change all of that in a heartbeat … and FOREVER.

If you wish to preserve Islam, yourself and all of your fellow Muslims must begin to eradicate the violent jihadists from within your midst.

DO NOT count upon the West to clean your filthy terrorist house for you. Should you be foolish enough and keep counting upon us to do so, then expect the moderate Muslim baby to be thrown out with the jihadist bath water.

Time is running out. Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons. Ahmadinejad is a prime candidate for unleashing Israel's Samson Option which will likely see the entire MME (Muslim Middle East), turned into a vast glow-in-the-dark parking lot of smoking, molten glass.

There is very little time left for Muslims to turn away from their dreams of violently imposing shari'a law upon the entire world. Should you and your fellow believers continue to hold faith in that fatal fantasy, it will bring about the Muslim holocaust.

You will have only Islam to blame. It is a toxic and lethal prescription against the reality of a militarily superior West that, in a few short hours, could end this entire jihad nonsense FOREVER.

Beware and pay close attention. Notice how so very few of your precious imams express the above concerns about Islam's permanent demise? They are leading you towards complete and total DEATH. You will not have many other warnings like this.

Nick said...

Why can't this guy countersue and say that he is deeply offended by this legal procedure which does not realy on truth, but only on emotion?

Hoist them by their own petard!

Nick said...

@ fahad,

If all the Muslims in the world cannot be hurt, then it follows that the Muslims who say their feelings have been hurt whenever a non-Muslim criticises their barbaric cult are lying.

All that is left according to your view is hordes of uneducated savages using the goodwill of civilised countries to impose the beliefs of their paedo-worshipping, Satanic pseodo-religion upon non-believers.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Nick said...

And btw fahad, Zenster has an excellent point. Once this Muslim-lover is out of the White House and Sarah Palin becomes the leader of the free world, all this nonsense about bowing to Islamic leaders and betraying the great nation of Israel, will stop.

You will then be faced with a devout Christian who loves both Israel - and guns.

mt said...

Stern words Zenster, stern words indeed. Obambi has told the world the US will never be at war with lslam - of course he could be wrong, he is wrong about so many things. lf there is a war l can see the Saudis squeeling like pigs and insisting they are innocent and have only love for the West.
The West doesnt have many nukes any more.

Zenster said...

mt: The West doesnt have many nukes any more.

What part of "At the beginning of 2007 the U.S. nuclear arsenal was composed of eight types of nuclear warheads (in thirteen variant mods) that are operationally deployed, with an estiamted count of 5,736 active stockpile warheads.", is unclear?
[emphasis added]

Consider the impact of:

Tripoli, Lybia
Cairo, Egypt
Khartoum, Sudan
Mogadishu, Somalia
Ankara, Turkey
Damascus, Syria
Baghdad, Iraq
Tehran, Iran
Saana, Yemen
Doha, Qatar
Muscat, Oman
Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
Mecca, Saudi Arabia
Medina, Saudi Arabia
Kabul, Afghanistasn
Islamabad, Pakistasn
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Jakarta, Indonesia

… all disappearing from the face of this earth.

How much momentum would Islamic jihad have after deploying some 00.314% of America's nuclear arsenal? Raise that number to a whopping 00.1%0 to account for redundant warheads being directed at each city in order to account for any in-flight device failures.

For all intents and purposes, global jihad would end. Nearly a billion Muslims would perish and overall destruction of infrastructure could be minimized through the use of enhanced radiation weapons, (i.e., "neutron bombs").

This would minimize disruption of the global petroleum supply chain and reduce the damage profile to heritage sites like Petra or Persepolis.

Islam continues to skate upon thin ice believing that its safety lies in its speed. The insane sense of infallability held by so many Muslims is nothing more than a death wish when held up to the standards of modern mechanized warfare.

A final note. Even the most cursory examination reveals how Afghanistan and Iraq have cost thousands of military casualties and well over one trillion dollars. Those two countries represent a tiny fraction of the nearly fifty odd Muslim nations that all must be brought to heel.

NO NATION ON EARTH possesses the military might or financial wealth to mount invasions or combat operations in all of these different locations. The sole cost-effective measure for dealing with such a widely distributed number of substantial targets is nuclear weapons. No other method can deliver the results needed in the timespan required.

It would do Islam and its Muslims very well to keep this in mind. It will be DECADES before Islam could possibly fabricate even a minute fraction of the nuclear weapons currently held by Western powers.

In those same decades it is literally guaranteed that Islamic fanatics, unfettered by a largely silent and inert Muslim population, will perpetrate atrocities via WMDs that will assure nuclear retaliation.

The is the Muslim holocaust writ large and people like fahad had best set about making his fellow Muslims well aware of just how bleak the outcome remains for jihadist Islam.

It is a spiritual, genetic and existential box canyon of previously unknown proportions and Muslims are being led willy nilly into this suicidal cul de sac by their deluded clerics and scholars. Worst of all:

ISLAM WOULDN'T HAVE IT ANY OTHER WAY.

Zenster said...

Raise that number to a whopping 00.10%

Correction: Raise that number to a whopping 01.00%

Yes, it takes only a mere ONE PERCENT of America's arsenal to obliterate the entire MME (Muslim Middle East) a few times over and still have another spare 99% to lob around just for grins.

Now, factor in the other nuclear armed Western countries like Britain, France and Sweden. This does not even include other nuclear powers like India or (quite probably) Japan that will, most likely, vigorously oppose any Islamic expansionism.

As Wretchard noted in his magnum opus, "The Three Conjectures":

The most startling result of this analysis is that a catastrophic outcome for Islam is guaranteed whether America retaliates or not.

If not any Western or pro-Western country, then it will fall to Russia or Communist China to obliterate Islam when its terrorists make too much of a nusiance of themselves.

Islam has "UNHAPPY ENDING" written all over it.

Anonymous said...

Zenster: I agree that Islam has "UNHAPPY ENDING" written all over it.

But....

1. As active fighting members of Western militaries, Western countries are busy handing Western Muslim jihadis the KEYS to our Western nuclear arsenals. After all, we mustn't sacrifice (Muslim) diversity for security, remember?

2. Western militaries (Russia) and countries (France and Britain) are going to be inundated by the Muslim baby boom that will convert Western countries into Muslim countries.

Your basic premise is correct that Muslims will be destroyed by the mother of all Holocausts - but, if current Western Muslim immigration policies remain, after the world is nominally Islamic, the Muslim Holocaust may very well be inflicted by one or more Muslim sects or countries upon other Muslim sects or countries.

Evidently, Iran's brand of Islam believes that their duty is to usher in extreme conflict which will bring the Mahdi back to earth. Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons definitely says nuclear war to me.

Anonymous said...

Zenster: I agree that Islam has "UNHAPPY ENDING" written all over it.

But....

1. As active fighting members of Western militaries, Western countries are busy handing Western Muslim jihadis the KEYS to our Western nuclear arsenals. After all, we mustn't sacrifice (Muslim) diversity for security, remember?

2. Western militaries (Russia) and countries (France and Britain) are going to be inundated by the Muslim baby boom that will convert Western countries into Muslim countries.

Your basic premise is correct that Muslims will be destroyed by the mother of all Holocausts - but, if current Western Muslim immigration policies remain, after the world is nominally Islamic, the Muslim Holocaust may very well be inflicted by one or more Muslim sects or countries upon other Muslim sects or countries.

Evidently, Iran's brand of Islam believes that their duty is to usher in extreme conflict which will bring the Mahdi back to earth. Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons definitely says nuclear war to me.

fahad said...

you have failed to occupy Afghanistan and Pakistan after 10 years of war.Unbelievable!.You cannot win everything through military power.More and More christian will convert to Islam if u continues your killing mission.It is a harsh reality.Look at sister-in-law of tony blair.May be it is you who will convert to islam tomorrow.May Allah bless all the Muslims.turkey

goethechosemercy said...

Islam has nothing to offer anyone in the West. Except dreams of conquest, domination, making the infidel "feel himself to be subdued".
Islam is only for the enraged.
For the striving and caring, it offers nothing.