Geert Wilders to Be Charged with Hate Speech in Netherlands

World • Views: 7,177

Dutch MP Geert Wilders is going to be charged under the Netherlands’ absurd anti-free speech laws: Islam film Dutch MP to be charged.

A Dutch court has ordered prosecutors to put a right-wing politician on trial for making anti-Islamic statements.

Freedom Party leader Geert Wilders made a controversial film last year equating Islam with violence and has likened the Koran to Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf. “In a democratic system, hate speech is considered so serious that it is in the general interest to… draw a clear line,” the court in Amsterdam said.

Mr Wilders said the judgement was an “attack on the freedom of expression”.

“Participation in the public debate has become a dangerous activity. If you give your opinion, you risk being prosecuted,” he said. Not only he, but all Dutch citizens opposed to the “Islamisation” of their country would be on trial, Mr Wilders warned. “Who will stand up for our culture if I am silenced?” he added.

Wilders, however, has called for the Koran to be outlawed. In other words, Wilders wants to ban books with which he doesn’t agree. If there’s one thing we should have learned from history, it’s that book-banning never turns out well—and it’s anathema to the American ideals of free speech and free choice of religion.

This prosecution is disgusting and wrong, but it’s difficult to cast Wilders as an icon of free speech when he explicitly advocates taking away the rights of others.

Jump to bottom

1103 comments
1 rawmuse  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:28:02am

Change!

2 Ojoe  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:28:35am

This is a black day

3 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:28:57am

Hell froze over

4 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:29:15am
5 Lee Coller  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:29:48am

Thank God for the First Amendment.

6 lawhawk  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:29:56am

Perhaps you should read books instead of burning them. /Dr. Henry Jones, Sr.

7 yesandno  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:30:09am

Blame the messanger...........

then hang him for hate speech

/

8 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:30:12am
This prosecution is disgusting and wrong, but it’s difficult to cast Wilders as an icon of free speech when he explicitly advocates taking away the rights of others.

I agree. It's a double edge sword, and as they say, "those who live by the sword...."

9 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:30:15am

Neither option is one to be praised or lauded about.

Is it time to bring down the curtain yet on Western Civilization?

10 MJ  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:30:32am

Unfortunately, cases of free speech sometimes revolve around revolting figures. The Nazi march in Skokie is one such example.

11 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:30:41am

re: #4 ploome hineni

how do we bring pressure to the Netherland government?

Send some Gitmo detainees?

12 doppelganglander  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:30:51am

This sort of thing is why I thank God every day for our Constitution, and specifically our first amendment.

13 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:31:00am

re: #5 Lee Coller

Thank God for the First Amendment.

Wait for O to try to reactivate the Fairness Doctrine in 21st Century form.

14 realwest  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:31:27am

Charles: "This prosecution is disgusting and wrong, but it’s difficult to cast Wilders as an icon of free speech when he explicitly advocates taking away the rights of others."
Yeah, sorta like Lefties here: freedom of expression for me, but not for thee.
Thank God that the US has the Bill of Rights.

15 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:32:38am

rights can be taken away by our new overlords

16 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:32:54am

re: #14 realwest

Charles: "This prosecution is disgusting and wrong, but it’s difficult to cast Wilders as an icon of free speech when he explicitly advocates taking away the rights of others."
Yeah, sorta like Lefties here: freedom of expression for me, but not for thee.
Thank God that the US has the Bill of Rights.

After listening to 44's press conference, I think that might be the US Bill of strong suggestions.

17 CommonCents  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:32:56am
This prosecution is disgusting and wrong, but it’s difficult to cast Wilders as an icon of free speech when he explicitly advocates taking away the rights of others.

Advocating the banning of a book is not banning a book. If they want to try him for something then it shouldn't be his free speech but perhaps a conspiracy to violate others free speech.

Either way, I call Bullshit! on this one too.

How about the thousands of angry Jihadist and sympathizers who march in the streets of the Netherlands calling for the death of all but them. Where are their trials?

18 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:33:40am

Wilders needs to give up his ridiculous position.

19 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:33:43am

re: #14 realwest

Charles: "This prosecution is disgusting and wrong, but it’s difficult to cast Wilders as an icon of free speech when he explicitly advocates taking away the rights of others."
Yeah, sorta like Lefties here: freedom of expression for me, but not for thee.
Thank God that the US has the Bill of Rights.

Just something childish O wants to put away in favor of something more inclusive of collectivism.

20 Racer X  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:33:46am

Ban it? Hell, it should be required reading for everyone in America.

Double hell - it should be REQUIRED reading for everyone in the middle east and Indonesia. Perhaps then they will know exactly what they have signed up for.

Islam is not a religion. It is a cult that demands submission. It demands domination and abuse of women. It demands violence towards Jews and non-believers.

Spread the word.

21 notutopia  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:34:02am

You're correct Charles. One good turn deserves another.
He shot himself in the foot with his own gun!
He should have never mixed freedom of opinion in speech with banning the freedom of reading that same speech. I hope he survives this legal round and changes his tactics.

22 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:34:03am

re: #5 Lee Coller

Thank God for the First Amendment.

Europeans have yet to really understand American style freedom and liberty (Including Geert). It sad to watch.

23 maddogg  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:34:16am
This prosecution is disgusting and wrong, but it’s difficult to cast Wilders as an icon of free speech when he explicitly advocates taking away the rights of others.


It seems free speech isn't a hallowed right in the Netherlands anyway. No free speech, no freedom.

24 Bloodnok  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:34:27am

B-B-B-But they have better healthcare than the US.

/LLL

25 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:34:35am

I'm also having a hard time being sympathetic if he's going to run with neo-fascists and their sympathizers. But I guess that's the price one pays for the company they keep.

26 mcainiac  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:34:39am

I am looking at TV Now showing a whole passle of lefties taking the oath from VP with BHO smirking.. these clowns are going to take over? Look at them all fusty college types not one would make it through a winter up here!

27 realwest  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:34:42am

re: #15 faraway
Not without our consent - need a constitutional amendment to do that and IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN.

28 tfc3rid  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:34:46am

Banning of the Koran aside, this type of hate speech prosecution is dangerous. I expect the current Obama Administration to pursue this as a way to not only stifle Conservative Talk radio but also to silence the Loyal Opposition.

Is that crazy? Maybe.

29 FightingBack  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:35:19am

re: #15 faraway

rights can be taken away by our new overlords

Only the annointed can speak the Middle Name.

30 Born_to_lose  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:35:20am

Well, when the book that Wilders wants to ban is chock full o'doctrine that instructs it's adheants to kill, conquer, and subjugate benefactors of Western civilization (i.e., People of the Book, pagans, unbelievers of/in Allah, and so forth) due to the fact that Western ideals don't congeal or jive with it's own facsist sentiments, well, then, I think Wilders has got something right. My hope is that this gets major news coverage so that the veil of denial that the impact Sharia is/can/will have on the west is exposed. I also will be praying for Geert Wilders' safety and eventual exemption from this rediculous charge!

31 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:35:33am

re: #22 Killgore Trout

Europeans have yet to really understand American style freedom and liberty (Including Geert). It sad to watch.

It is crap like this that inspired the Founding Fathers to draft what became the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

32 brookly red  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:35:41am

Gee, I guess that was my last Heineken.

33 mcainiac  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:36:06am

I am reading ATLAS and Pam and she has a lot of pictures of her and that dutch guy so probably they have something going on.

34 Racer X  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:36:11am

re: #14 realwest


Yeah, sorta like Lefties here: freedom of expression for me, but not for thee.
Thank God that the US has the Bill of Rights.

I agree with you RW. Just try to place a bumpersticker on your car that says "Dissent is Patriotic". See how fast it gets ripped off now.

35 Lee Coller  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:36:23am

re: #13 FurryOldGuyJeans

Wait for O to try to reactivate the Fairness Doctrine in 21st Century form.


re: #22 Killgore Trout

Europeans have yet to really understand American style freedom and liberty (Including Geert). It sad to watch.

I think a lot of Americans don't realize how unique our First and Second Amendments are!

36 maddogg  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:36:34am

If it is free speech for one man to quote the Koran , then its free speech for another man to wipe his ass with it.

37 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:36:36am
38 realwest  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:37:06am

re: #25 Sharmuta
Well I certainly agree with you about the company he has CHOSEN to keep, but don't think that factors in here at all.
Charles has it right: you really can't say freedom of speech for me but not for thee and be expected to be well received.

39 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:37:08am

re: #35 Lee Coller

I think a lot of Americans don't realize how unique our First and Second Amendments are!

I see too many that do and want to trash them anyway.

40 bulwrk  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:37:12am

re: #5 Lee Coller

Thank God for the First Amendment.

We'll see if that survives the remaking of America.

41 2by2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:37:17am

Desperate times induce desperate measures;
sure it's not according to American values of free speech and I doubt that Wilders' call for outlawing the Koran will ever be implemented by any of the European Governments, but he raises the issue of what the Koran is really about, and for that I salute him.
Europe, btw doesn't have a history of free speech and is quite known for it's measures to oppress ideas.........

42 Lincolntf  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:37:28am

re: #8 Sharmuta

It is a tricky situation, but it reminds me of the (somewhat reasonable) ban on swastikas in Germany. Europe has a much longer and bloodier history than the U.S, and much of that bloodshed was the direct result of simple words written on a sheet of paper.
I hope that the U.S. never takes "Hate Crimes" legislation so far that we have to deal with similar trials.

43 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:37:31am

re: #30 Born_to_lose

Well, when the book that Wilders wants to ban is chock full o'doctrine that instructs it's adheants to kill, conquer, and subjugate benefactors of Western civilization (i.e., People of the Book, pagans, unbelievers of/in Allah, and so forth) due to the fact that Western ideals don't congeal or jive with it's own facsist sentiments, well, then, I think Wilders has got something right. My hope is that this gets major news coverage so that the veil of denial that the impact Sharia is/can/will have on the west is exposed. I also will be praying for Geert Wilders' safety and eventual exemption from this rediculous charge!

There is nothing right about banning a book. You have no leg to stand on with that.

44 Dianna  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:37:40am

There's no such thing as an unambiguous situation in Europe, is there?

45 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:37:49am

re: #17 CommonCents

Advocating the banning of a book is not banning a book. If they want to try him for something then it shouldn't be his free speech but perhaps a conspiracy to violate others free speech.


But is agenda to ban the Quran and make Islam illegal is reprehensible. The laws used to prosecute him for free speech are equally awful. He would have a much better moral standing and would be a much better advocate for freedom of speech if he also advocated freedom for others.

46 tfc3rid  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:38:06am

re: #37 buzzsawmonkey

Perhaps Wilders is looking so that his trial will force a reading of some of the passages of the Koran in court, to 'prove' his case...

47 notutopia  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:38:08am

re: #32 brookly red

Gee, I guess that was my last Heineken.

Try quinness.

48 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:38:17am
49 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:38:21am

re: #36 maddogg

If it is free speech for one man to quote the Koran , then its free speech for another man to wipe his ass with it.

You really don't understand the illogic of Leftism and Mulit-Culturalism if you think fair applies to both.

50 Ay, Caramba  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:38:30am

re: #4 ploome hineni

I will no longer buy Dutch Porn.

51 Outrider  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:38:30am

wonder if he gets to introduce all the chapters and verses in the Koran and give examples of how they have been used to rationalize the "hate speech" and "hate actions" of the Islamic community in his defense case? Expose each chapter and verse to public scrutiny.

52 formercorpsman  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:38:33am

re: #46 tfc3rid

Examples read aloud?

53 realwest  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:38:33am

re: #28 tfc3rid
Well see that's the problem a lot of Democracies have. IIRC, the U.S. is the ONLY democracy that has a constitutional right of freedom of speech.

54 albusteve  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:38:48am

re: #25 Sharmuta

I'm also having a hard time being sympathetic if he's going to run with neo-fascists and their sympathizers. But I guess that's the price one pays for the company they keep.

where two fools met...as Charley would say

55 David IV of Georgia  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:38:49am

Citing facts is felonious?

I suppose they are going to round up all the imams who read from that book too, right?

56 akak  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:38:53am

re: #4 ploome hineni

how do we bring pressure to the Netherland government?

Challenge them in soccer.

57 notutopia  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:38:59am

re: #33 mcainiac

I am reading ATLAS and Pam and she has a lot of pictures of her and that dutch guy so probably they have something going on.

Time for the eye bleach. Are you a masochist?

58 Ringo the Gringo  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:39:02am
This prosecution is disgusting and wrong, but it’s difficult to cast Wilders as an icon of free speech when he explicitly advocates taking away the rights of others.

Do you think Wilders was serious when he called for banning the Koran (because it contains hate speech), or was he just trying to be ironic, turning hate speech laws on their heads?

If he was trying to be ironic, then the Dutch Government just saw his irony and doubled it by charging him with a hate speech crime for pointing out the hate speech contained in the koran.

59 keyword  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:39:12am

re: #31 FurryOldGuyJeans

It is crap like this that inspired the Founding Fathers to draft what became the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

There are plenty of books that were banned in the US well after the adoption of the constitution.

60 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:39:14am

re: #43 Walter L. Newton

There is nothing right about banning a book. You have no leg to stand on with that.

My wife has a copy of Little Black Sambo on the bookshelf. She brought it home from school, because the school system banned it.

61 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:39:17am

re: #47 notutopia

Try quinness.

It appears that you already have today. LOL
/

62 wrenchwench  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:39:38am

re: #37 buzzsawmonkey

(don't know if it is also banned in the Netherlands)


Looks like it is (from Charles's link):

A year earlier, Mr Wilders described the Koran as a "fascist book" and called for it to be banned in "the same way we ban Mein Kampf", in a letter published in the De Volkskrant newspaper.

63 tfc3rid  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:39:46am

re: #52 formercorpsman

Examples read aloud?

Perhaps? I could see it...

64 tfc3rid  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:40:11am

re: #53 realwest

Well see that's the problem a lot of Democracies have. IIRC, the U.S. is the ONLY democracy that has a constitutional right of freedom of speech.

Thank God we do!

65 SFGoth  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:40:12am

Is Mein Kampf available in Germany? We in the U.S. are a bit naive in that we've never really had speech enable such extremes as Nazi Germany. We ban child porn don't we?

66 maddogg  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:40:20am

re: #49 FurryOldGuyJeans

You really don't understand the illogic of Leftism and Mulit-Culturalism if you think fair applies to both.

If I actually start to understand the illogic of leftism, I'll do the world a favor rid it of my useless presence.

67 realwest  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:40:21am

re: #34 Racer X
Yeah, but it won't be ripped off by the Government - and yes that is a BIG difference.

68 albusteve  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:40:39am

re: #48 buzzsawmonkey

The First Amendment may well survive, on paper--but between hate-speech laws and the prissy propriety of PC it may well do so as a hollow shell.

same with the 2nd....and it will turn into ALOT of hollow shells

69 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:40:44am

re: #59 keyword

There are plenty of books that were banned in the US well after the adoption of the constitution.

Never said it was a guarantee of perfection, you know.

70 Outrider  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:41:08am

re: #60 jwb7605

My wife has a copy of Little Black Sambo on the bookshelf. She brought it home from school, because the school system banned it.

or Tom Sawyer?

71 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:41:08am

re: #60 jwb7605

My wife has a copy of Little Black Sambo on the bookshelf. She brought it home from school, because the school system banned it.

Removing a book from a school is different than making it a criminal offense to read a certain book. We don't allow porn in schools either. Big difference.

72 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:41:10am

re: #59 keyword

There are plenty of books that were banned in the US well after the adoption of the constitution.

Name one that is banned today.

73 notutopia  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:41:10am

re: #61 Walter L. Newton

It appears that you already have today. LOL
/

Typo? loL.
/

74 Lizard by the Bay  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:41:15am

This is why all hate speech laws are wrong. They attempt to criminalize thought, and worse, the determining of what is "unnacceptable thought" is entirely capricious and can be changed and applied retroactively at any time.

Nonetheless, "Hate Crimes Legislation" is at the top of Obambi's list. This circus of freaks will not be relegated to our college campuses for long.

75 unreconstructed rebel  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:41:22am

re: #60 jwb7605

My wife has a copy of Little Black Sambo on the bookshelf. She brought it home from school, because the school system banned it.

Sadly, the public school system has been removed from the arena of public discourse most of us enjoy as citizens.

76 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:41:27am

re: #30 Born_to_lose

Think about what is entailed in the banning of the Quran. Are police going to raid homes and arrest people? Will reciting a prayer land people in court? Will people have to worship in basements and hope their neighbors don't call the police? It's a nightmare scenario.

77 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:41:40am
78 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:41:54am

re: #68 albusteve

same with the 2nd....and it will turn into ALOT of hollow shells

Remove the protections of the 2nd amendment and the rest of the Constitution becomes invalid.

79 Silhouette  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:41:54am
“In a democratic system, hate speech is considered so serious that it is in the general interest to... draw a clear line,” the court in Amsterdam said.

In a system where the people rule, it is important for The State to limit what the people can say.

/

80 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:41:55am

re: #65 SFGoth

Is Mein Kampf available in Germany? We in the U.S. are a bit naive in that we've never really had speech enable such extremes as Nazi Germany. We ban child porn don't we?

It's not the same. Child pornography involves the sexual violation of minors.

81 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:42:23am

re: #38 realwest

And I already agreed with Charles on that. I'm being honest- if he wants to hang with VB, pamela and robert then my sympathy meter is waning. On principle, he's a hypocrite. I like neither hypocrites nor fascists and their sympathizers.

82 2by2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:42:23am

re: #65 SFGoth

Is Mein Kampf available in Germany? We in the U.S. are a bit naive in that we've never really had speech enable such extremes as Nazi Germany. We ban child porn don't we?

Nope, it's not, and for good reasons, I'd say.
Germany has the toughest laws against any type of Nazi propaganda, and fairly I don't think they have much of a choice in the matter.

83 so.cal.swede  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:42:28am

we shouldn't be surprised that people in Europe are calling for such things as book-bannings. After all, their own governments has often no concept of TRUE free speech, they ban books, free speech and expression themselves every day with their "hate speech" laws.

I love the American liberty ideals, and looking back on my life as a European, I now feel as if I was blinded, muted and deafened there.

Someone else said it best: I might not agree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it with my life. That's what America is all about.

84 Adrenalyn  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:43:12am

I don't know
he is saying we don't need a book that does the equivalent of yelling "fire" in a crowded theater (mosque)

tough call
especially because not all who read the Koran are incited to violent acts

85 Ringo the Gringo  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:43:13am

re: #59 keyword

There are plenty of books that were banned in the US well after the adoption of the constitution.

As far as I know all were banned for being "obscene" (Tropic of Cancer, Naked Lunch etc), not for hate speech or for political reasons.

86 realwest  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:43:20am

re: #41 2by2
"Europe, btw doesn't have a history of free speech and is quite known for it's measures to oppress ideas........."
Spot on. With the (ironic) exception of Germany and the Hitler/Nazi's.

87 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:43:21am

Librarians "select" books that contain kiddie sex and other liberal themes. Then, when they are confronted, you are charged with "banning" books.

So, I would like to know more before I charge someone with book banning.

88 FightingBack  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:43:21am

re: #65 SFGoth

Is Mein Kampf available in Germany? We in the U.S. are a bit naive in that we've never really had speech enable such extremes as Nazi Germany. We ban child porn don't we?

Because the production of it harms children. We'd stop someone from inking a press with human blood, too.

89 keyword  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:43:43am

re: #72 MandyManners

I did use past tense in the verb :)

90 yma o hyd  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:43:53am

re: #37 buzzsawmonkey

I don't support Wilders' suggestion that the Koran be banned. However, within the context of the hate-speech laws in the Netherlands, he may be doing so for a calculated purpose; to communicate the nature of the hate-speech in the Koran and thereby make the Dutch, and Europeans generally, aware of the fascistic nature of Islamism.

Drawing a parallel between the Koran and Hitler's Mein Kampf, which is banned in Germany (don't know if it is also banned in the Netherlands) is the strongest and most direct way he can do this, given the apparent level of "hate-speech" restrictions in Europe.

I think banning books is a terrible idea, and I hope that Wilders is, indeed, using the analogy as a teaching tool rather than seriously seeking to ban the Koran; that is, I hope he is grandstanding in order to break through the shell of willful blindness in his own society.

Leaving aside for the moment the company he now keeps - what you say chimes in with how I understood FITNA.
There, he did not say 'ban the Qur'an' - he asked why such a concoction of vileness cannot be banned.
Very small but important difference.
I hope this really was a ploy by him - far to few people know what the Qur'an really says. Far too many people listen to the 'moderate' muslims who tell us its all peaceful, and if you start asking questions, the answer is, infallibly, that not being an arab and muslim scholar, one cannot possibly understand, nor should one dare to read that 'Holy' book by oneself.

91 Charles Johnson  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:44:00am

re: #58 Ringo the Gringo

Do you think Wilders was serious when he called for banning the Koran (because it contains hate speech), or was he just trying to be ironic, turning hate speech laws on their heads?

No - he's quite serious about it.

92 SFGoth  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:44:20am

re: #80 MandyManners

It's not the same. Child pornography involves the sexual violation of minors.

So? What does content have to do with it? The Koran involves the destruction of Western civilization so that pedophiles will inherit the Earth -- that doesn't involve the sexual violation of minors? What other extrinsic ends justify the banning of other printed matter and who decides what ends are more equal than others?

93 doppelganglander  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:44:26am

re: #60 jwb7605

My wife has a copy of Little Black Sambo on the bookshelf. She brought it home from school, because the school system banned it.

That was one of my favorite books as a child. I kept my copy and read it to my own kids. Do the book banners notice that a) Sambo is Indian, not African, and b) Sambo outsmarts the tigers? Sambo is a classic trickster character, but I guess you can't expect librarians and educators to know anything about mythology and literature.

94 jorline  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:44:44am

Why is it I never see Muslims prosecuted for hate speech?

95 David IV of Georgia  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:44:44am

re: #22 Killgore Trout

Europeans have yet to really understand American style freedom and liberty (Including Geert). It sad to watch.

I remember talking to Eastern Europeans not long after the demise of communism there. They would talk about America being a free country and had all sorts of bizarre ideas about what that meant: generally bordering on anarchy and avoidance of all personal responsibility.

96 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:45:17am

re: #70 Outrider

or Tom Sawyer?

I think that's gone, too.
re: #71 Walter L. Newton

Removing a book from a school is different than making it a criminal offense to read a certain book. We don't allow porn in schools either. Big difference.

Banning a book is a judgmental thing.
A large percentage of schools don't allow the Bible, either, so the whole thing is a double-edged decision. (NO Walter, I'm not advocating child porn, either).

97 FightingBack  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:45:28am

re: #92 SFGoth

It's not the content, it's the act of production that is a crime. Simulated child pron is legal. (spit.)

98 2by2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:45:48am

re: #86 realwest

"Europe, btw doesn't have a history of free speech and is quite known for it's measures to oppress ideas........."
Spot on. With the (ironic) exception of Germany and the Hitler/Nazi's.

Well, in Nazi Germany only Hitler and his thugs had the right of free expression, everyone else who insisted on speaking out was shipped off to a Concentration Camp...

99 nyc redneck  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:45:48am

as i recall, there wasn't anything in the movie that wasn't true.
quotes taken directly from the koran are the reason he is being persecuted.

wilders is exposing the vile ideas , which inspire islamic jihad and the authorities would rather attack him than face the evil growing in their society.
this is so misguided. so counterproductive. so cowardly.

100 Adrenalyn  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:45:55am

re: #94 jorline

Why is it I never see Muslims prosecuted for hate speech?

because you never see America raise the price of food and medicine when the price of oil rises because of OPEC

we are afraid of political correctness
though I could say worse

101 wrenchwench  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:45:58am
"This is a happy day for all followers of Islam who do not want to be tossed on the garbage dump of Nazism," he [Gerard Spong] told reporters.

But what about the followers who do want to be tossed there?

102 Ringo the Gringo  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:46:07am

re: #91 Charles

No - he's quite serious about it.

Interesting. So he's being charged with a hate speech crime for calling for the banning of what he considers to be hate speech.

Orwell must be spinning in his grave.

103 Silhouette  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:46:09am

re: #10 MJ

Unfortunately, cases of free speech sometimes revolve around revolting figures. The Nazi march in Skokie is one such example.

And the klan marches. There was one a few years ago about an hour from here.

People drove over to stand along the parade route and protest, but I thought that was the wrong tactic. It would have been better if the klan had marched down a completely empty street, ignored and irrelevant.

Or if they felt they must go, everyone on the sidewalks pretend to read newspapers with their backs to the street, all along the route.

104 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:46:10am

re: #59 keyword

There are plenty of books that were banned in the US well after the adoption of the constitution.

Name me one book that was banned by the federal government?

105 so.cal.swede  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:46:11am

re: #94 jorline

Why is it I never see Muslims prosecuted for hate speech?


I up-dinged you, but to be honest. There's a radio station in Sweden, Radio Islam, that constantly used to be slapped with hate speech judgements because of it's frequent and fervent jew-hatred.

106 albusteve  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:46:16am

re: #94 jorline

Why is it I never see Muslims prosecuted for hate speech?

if it were up to Geert and the VB there would be no Muslims at all in Holland...he's hard friggin core this guy

107 realwest  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:46:38am

re: #85 Ringo the Gringo
OTOH, one person's "obscenity" is anothers "art" no?
I mean, the SCOTUS has not served us well in terms of defining the limits of free speech, but at least it does prohibit PRIOR censorship - you get to publish before you can be sued or prosecuted.

108 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:46:38am

re: #77 buzzsawmonkey

Thanks.

All the more reason to suspect that Wilders' call to "ban the Koran" is intended as a means to awaken a supine citizenry to the danger within its midst, rather than a serious call for censorship.

I don't think so. There are more effective ways to highlight the double standard, and I'm not sure I've read anything or heard him in any interviews describing euro-hate speech laws and the koran as a double standard issue.

109 Lizard by the Bay  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:46:46am

re: #65 SFGoth

We in the U.S. are a bit naive in that we've never really had speech enable such extremes as Nazi Germany. We ban child porn don't we?

I can't.

Believe.

You went there.

Can you not see that child pornography is a crime of sexual assault? And that every time the photos are distributed, the victim is violated again? In other words, it's an ongoing, sometimes never-ending sexual assault.

To even bring it up in a "free speech" discussion is like shitting in the punchbowl. You just want the party to end, apparently.

110 brookly red  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:47:03am

Hmmmmm, maybe the could just edit out the parts that promote violence./
that seems fair, no?

111 tfc3rid  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:47:06am

re: #97 FightingBack

It's not the content, it's the act of production that is a crime. Simulated child pron is legal. (spit.)

Saw that on a Law and Order SVU earlier this season...

112 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:47:13am

re: #92 SFGoth

So? What does content have to do with it? The Koran involves the destruction of Western civilization so that pedophiles will inherit the Earth -- that doesn't involve the sexual violation of minors? What other extrinsic ends justify the banning of other printed matter and who decides what ends are more equal than others?

What in the world? That's just plain nuts. Don't you understand what rape does to a small child?

113 Racer X  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:47:15am

re: #50 Ay, Caramba

I will no longer buy Dutch Porn.

You pay?

114 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:47:17am

Geert's proposal.....
Dutch MP Wilders strikes again: calls for ban on Quran

The leader of the Netherlands’ right-wing Freedom Party, Geert Wilders, has called for a ban on the sale and distribution of the Qur’an. He would also outlaw the book’s use in the mosque and at home. Mr Wilders says the Qur’an (Koran) is a fascist book which promotes violence and is similar to Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf.

In a letter-to-the-editor in today’s de Volkskrant newspaper, Wilders argues that the Qur’an should only be permitted for research at an academic level.
....
Geert Wilders compares the Qur’an with Mein Kampf, which was written by Adolf Hitler in 1924. In his book, Hitler explained his theories about National Socialism, anti-Semitism and the superiority of the Aryan race.

The sale of Mein Kampf is outlawed in the Netherlands, but owning or trading old copies is permitted. However, Mr Wilders’ proposal to ban the Qur’an is more drastic than the ban on Mein Kampf because it would also outlaw the possession of the book.

115 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:47:21am

re: #89 keyword

I did use past tense in the verb :)

Then name one of the "past" books that were banned by the federal government.

You don't get out of it that easy.

116 Dustyvet  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:47:22am

re: #88 FightingBack

Because the production of it harms children. We'd stop someone from inking a press with human blood, too.

Mein Kampf is now public domain?

117 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:47:55am

re: #94 jorline

Why is it I never see Muslims prosecuted for hate speech?

For the same reason you never see black activists prosecuted for inciting violence.

FEAR.

118 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:47:57am

re: #96 jwb7605

Banning a book is a judgmental thing.
A large percentage of schools don't allow the Bible, either, so the whole thing is a double-edged decision. (NO Walter, I'm not advocating child porn, either).

The Bible is banned? What?

119 Ringo the Gringo  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:48:11am

Funny, spell check still highlight the word 'Obama'.

The Lords of Spell Check are going to have to fix that one now that the coronation is over.

120 Randall Gross  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:48:12am

Charles, you go right to the heart of the cognitive dissonance in the words and actions of the Right in Europe. This is just another flavor of "free speech for me but not for thee" doctrines we see in other parties. Geert's call to ban the Koran is over the top political hyperbole, outlawing scarves is attacking a symptom not the essential problem.

121 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:48:19am
122 keyword  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:48:24am

His argument is that since Main Kampf is banned in Holland, the Koran could be, too. Wrong, yes. Rational?

123 albusteve  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:48:29am

re: #108 Sharmuta

I don't think so. There are more effective ways to highlight the double standard, and I'm not sure I've read anything or heard him in any interviews describing euro-hate speech laws and the koran as a double standard issue.

what's the name of the VB document that lay's it all out....some people might loke to surf that for a better feel for his Geertness....the man is despicable

124 Lizard by the Bay  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:48:45am

re: #116 Dustyvet

Mein Kampf is now public domain?

I don't think the "Hitler Estate" is collecting royalties.

125 bulwrk  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:48:47am

re: #70 Outrider

or Tom Sawyer?


Teacher wants to expel Huck Finn


"The time has arrived to update the literature we use in high school classrooms," Foley wrote in a guest column this month for the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. "Barack Obama is president-elect of the United States, and novels that use the 'N-word' repeatedly need to go."

Foley, 48, teaches at a largely white suburban high school near Portland, Ore. Year after year, he said, he patiently explains to his students that Jim, a black man, is actually the hero of the novel, and that Huck comes to see the error of his ways and commits to helping Jim escape slavery. But many of them find the book dull and plodding, and they sometimes never get past the demeaning word Huck uses to refer to his friend.

126 Born_to_lose  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:48:59am

re: #76 Killgore Trout

So is the idea of losing my freedoms here in the good ol US OF A.

127 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:49:22am

List of banned books

128 Dustyvet  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:49:25am

re: #124 Lizard by the Bay

I don't think the "Hitler Estate" is collecting royalties.

Just did a web search and found it listed as public domain.

129 Lincolntf  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:49:38am

re: #104 Walter L. Newton

I don't think there were ever any Federal bans (though the Anarchist's Cookbook was once seriously considered a threat and some Congressmen wanted it banned), but books and films were regularly "Banned in Boston" up until about the 60's.

130 Jewels (AKA Julian)  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:49:40am

again.....Europe has become Weak and Weird and I want little to do with them as possible. and now Obama is going to import that level of stupidity here....*sigh*

131 yma o hyd  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:49:48am

re: #83 so.cal.swede

we shouldn't be surprised that people in Europe are calling for such things as book-bannings. After all, their own governments has often no concept of TRUE free speech, they ban books, free speech and expression themselves every day with their "hate speech" laws.

I love the American liberty ideals, and looking back on my life as a European, I now feel as if I was blinded, muted and deafened there.

Someone else said it best: I might not agree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it with my life. That's what America is all about.

That 'someone else', btw was Voltaire - a Frenchman.

Please don't forget that the founding Fathers were educated Europeans before they became Americans - and that they did take a lot of the best thoughts and philosophies europe had to offer when they built your great country.

132 so.cal.swede  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:49:56am

re: #119 Ringo the Gringo

Funny, spell check still highlight the word 'Obama'.

The Lords of Spell Check are going to have to fix that one now that the coronation is over.

You typed 'Obama'. Did you mean to type 'The Chosen One'?
- Spellchecker

133 Kragar  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:49:57am

Censoring the Koran is not an answer.

Offering a point by point rebuttal on why it is wrong and why it should not be followed or why it leads to terrorism is not hate speech.

134 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:50:31am

re: #122 keyword

His argument is that since Main Kampf is banned in Holland, the Koran could be, too. Wrong, yes. Rational?

Both Mandy and myself have an open question to you, which you seem to be ignoring.

Which books, in the past, have been banned by the federal government?

135 SFGoth  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:50:40am

re: #97 FightingBack

It's not the content, it's the act of production that is a crime. Simulated child pron is legal. (spit.)

No, people have been prosecuted for child porn for drawing images they imagined. The end justifies the means w/child porn but not the subversion of Western civilization.

136 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:50:40am

re: #77 buzzsawmonkey

See my #114

I don't think he's being ironic, He knows it will never pass but he does seem serious about it. There were even reports that he mentioned his proposal at the latest counter0jihad summit in Jerusalem, it widely cheered.

137 notutopia  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:51:00am

re: #93 doppelganglander

That was one of my favorite books as a child. I kept my copy and read it to my own kids. Do the book banners notice that a) Sambo is Indian, not African, and b) Sambo outsmarts the tigers? Sambo is a classic trickster character, but I guess you can't expect librarians and educators to know anything about mythology and literature.

I have a whole collection of this books releases.
It was not the original story that was the problem. It was the later renditions printed with Westernized pictures that earned it's banning from the school system library.
[Link: www.ferris.edu...]

138 Spenser (with an S)  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:51:06am

Well, this was a good day for my copy of An American Carol to come in at the library (would love to buy a copy, but kids shoes and milk come first).

139 Charles Johnson  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:51:20am

re: #119 Ringo the Gringo

Funny, spell check still highlight the word 'Obama'.

I guess it's time to add that to the dictionary.

140 Born_to_lose  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:51:34am

re: #91 Charles

No, actually, he's quite the showman, according to some schools of thought. I am sure this was an attempt to generate some publicity towards his cause. But either way, I agree with the sentiment ;o)

141 doppelganglander  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:51:50am

re: #121 buzzsawmonkey

The Little Black Sambo book I had as a kid depicted Sambo as African, more or less--though his clothes, come to think of it, were Indian/Persian, and tigers of course are not native to Africa.

But things like that mean nothing to the PC brigade. Dr. Doolittle too has been bowdlerized, if not banned entirely, because his depiction of a (sympathetic) African king is considered a negative sterotype.

I shouldn't be surprised. I am thoroughly convinced that most people who want to ban "Huckleberry Finn" have never read it. If they had, they'd know that Jim is an intelligent, wise, and sympathetic character.

/English major

142 yma o hyd  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:51:55am

re: #94 jorline

Why is it I never see Muslims prosecuted for hate speech?

Excellent question!

Perhaps because they're 'victims' and can't help themselves?
Also - its their culture - and 'we must try and understand'?

143 FightingBack  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:51:59am

re: #125 bulwrk

Then they shouldn't teach the history of slavery. That's

dull and plodding

too.

144 Opinionated  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:52:15am
equating Islam with violence

He's guilty. I'm guilty. Every thinking person is guilty.

Now truth is a crime.

145 keyword  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:52:15am

re: #115 Walter L. Newton

Then name one of the "past" books that were banned by the federal government.

You don't get out of it that easy.

I didn't say Federal government.

146 realwest  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:52:18am

re: #127 faraway
Kindly note, from your link: "Banned in the USA in 1821 for obscenity, then again in 1963. This was the last book ever banned in the USA.[3] "
emphasis added realwest.

147 so.cal.swede  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:52:20am

re: #131 yma o hyd

That 'someone else', btw was Voltaire - a Frenchman.

Please don't forget that the founding Fathers were educated Europeans before they became Americans - and that they did take a lot of the best thoughts and philosophies europe had to offer when they built your great country.

Right, and what was Voltaire? The biggest critic of the European civilization of his time, ranking among the top critics of all time. He knew what was up, as did the founders of America, that's why they left in the first place.

You completely misunderstood me, I didn't say "all europeans are bad people" i said "We shouldn't be surprised that europeans call for book bannings, because their governments ban books every day".

148 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:52:37am

Messiah is the preferred spelling for Obama

149 unreconstructed rebel  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:52:52am

re: #125 bulwrk

Huck comes to see the error of his ways and commits to helping Jim escape slavery. But many of them find the book dull and plodding, and they sometimes never get past the demeaning word Huck uses to refer to his friend.


Huck learned about and repented from evil, but continued to use the word because it was the only one he knew.

150 Lizard by the Bay  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:53:02am

re: #133 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Censoring the Koran is not an answer.

In fact, the wider it is distributed, the better. Makes taqiyya much more difficult. I think a special annotated version should be published, so that people can be pointed right to the most bloodthirsty parts, read about abrogation, and come to truly understand what Islam is really about.

It would be pretty stupid to ban the one thing which proves the real purpose of Jihad and "being a good Muslim".

151 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:53:04am

re: #129 Lincolntf

I don't think there were ever any Federal bans (though the Anarchist's Cookbook was once seriously considered a threat and some Congressmen wanted it banned), but books and films were regularly "Banned in Boston" up until about the 60's.

That was do to the influence of the Catholic Church and a local issue. My question is show me a book that the federal government has banned?

152 SFGoth  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:53:14am

re: #148 faraway

Messiah is the preferred spelling for Obama

Genuflect when you say that pal! (Name the source of that quote)

153 notutopia  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:53:22am

re: #104 Walter L. Newton

Name me one book that was banned by the federal government?


Book banning
[Link: www.answers.com...]

154 winston06  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:53:27am

Eurabia, Canuckistan.... Pakistan. :-P

155 CyanSnowHawk  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:53:44am

re: #93 doppelganglander

That was one of my favorite books as a child. I kept my copy and read it to my own kids. Do the book banners notice that a) Sambo is Indian, not African, and b) Sambo outsmarts the tigers? Sambo is a classic trickster character, but I guess you can't expect librarians and educators to know anything about mythology and literature.

That book (Sambo) fell victim to the widely held perception of, rather than the actual, content, as did the restaurants.

Isn't Geert's problem with Koran that it insights violence and that is why he called for it to be banned? Is that a valid reason to call for that? I don't know if that is treated in the same way as say, a public speaker. Even if that is his objection, I have to stand on the side that says you do not ban books.

156 karmic_inquisitor  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:54:19am

This all goes back to the European inability to have a balanced, open debate on controversial issues. "Hate speech" laws will always be used to curtail free speech rights - there is no avoiding it regardless of the otherwise good intentions of those who advocate "hate speech" bans.

The lack of a center in European politics and media is due to the suffocation of expression of conservative viewpoints. This will continue there.

but we will now see the same tested here - ironic that Tom Hanks can declare Mormons unpatriotic for supporting prop 8 in California after the same contingent has screamed "don't question my patriotism" for 7 years. This contingent now has total power and will use it, in part, to suppress conservative viewpoints much like Europe.

Sadly, the result will not be a moderate, informed society - Europe has already demonstrated that "hate speech" laws simply engender extremism and tear at the social fabric that free expression creates.

157 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:54:26am

I don't like the hate-speech laws in europe. What they are doing to Mr. Wilders is wrong.

But his proposed "solutions" are just as wrong.

Thank God my ancestors left that continent. God Bless America.

158 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:54:40am

re: #134 Walter L. Newton

Both Mandy and myself have an open question to you, which you seem to be ignoring.

Which books, in the past, have been banned by the federal government?

Check faraway's link.

Fanny Hill or Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure -- Banned in the USA in 1821 for obscenity, then again in 1963. This was the last book ever banned in the USA.[3] See also Memoirs v. Massachusetts.

There are several others. (Lady Chatterly's Lover).

159 rightside  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:55:11am

Release the gitmo detainees into Hollywood.

160 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:55:11am
The Court ruled in Board of Education Island Trees Union Free School District v. Pico that books may not be removed if the decision to do so is motivated by disapproval of the viewpoint expressed in the book.

Would that have been a liberal court?

161 Racer X  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:55:24am

re: #139 Charles

I guess it's time to add that to the dictionary.

Can you put a nifty trick in that changes "Obama" to "The One"?

Or would that be too much?

162 Dustyvet  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:55:34am

The Koran For Dummies


ordering a copy...:)

163 so.cal.swede  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:55:37am

.. although i'd rather have 1000 books banned for sexuality than 1 for political opinion.

164 zombie  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:55:43am

Charles says:

Wilders, however, has called for the Koran to be outlawed. In other words, Wilders wants to ban books with which he doesn’t agree. If there’s one thing we should have learned from history, it’s that book-banning never turns out well—and it’s anathema to the American ideals of free speech and free choice of religion.

This prosecution is disgusting and wrong, but it’s difficult to cast Wilders as an icon of free speech when he explicitly advocates taking away the rights of others.

Remember, however, that American and European societies do in fact ban books, right now -- books with which the majority of people strongly disagree.

Child pornography, for example, is banned in America. Just try publishing a child porn book and see how long it remained unbanned and you remain unjailed.

Book that contained unnverified slander are essentially banned. Just try publishing a book that says outrageous and unprovable claims about an innocent person -- "Mr. XYZ is a serial killer, and he murdered his first wife" -- and see how long that book remains on the shelves and you find yourself un-sued.

Books that seriously compromise national security are also in effect banned: just try stealing the blueprints for our nuclear warheads and publishing them in book form. The FBI would be knocking on your door in about 90 seconds.

Etc. etc.

(And in Europe, Nazi imagery is banned from being published [except as a "scholarly work"].)

So, yes, while we like to claim we have completely unfettered free speech in American society, in truth we de facto ban books all the time.

It all comes down to "community standards" -- we as a nationwide community agreed that child porn and nuclear weapons diagrams and ruinous slander were simply unacceptable and thus were banned.

But if those standards change, or if a mass consensus arrives that certain ideas/images/books are unacceptable, then, yes, those can be banned as well, and not violate our principles of free speech any more than our current bannings do.

Geert Wilders was floating the idea that, in the Netherlands, the Koran be considered for inclusion among those works which the community at large deem unacceptable. Perhaps the Quran does in fact contain child porn (advocating sex with underage girls), slanders people unfairly (Jews), and endangers national security (by advocating a transnational allegiance to a different undemocratic worldview). And if, in most Dutch people's opinions, it contains enough hate and noxious ideologies that it does indeed merit inclusion among other previously banned works, then so be it. I don't think that makes Wilders an out-of-control "book banner." It is, after all, up for the entire nation to decide. He just raised the possibility. If one doesn't like that possibility, then don't agree to the banning, and don't vote for Wilders.

But to imprison someone just for raising the option of slightly changing the parameters of what counts as ban-worthy -- that is outrageous, in my book.

165 Silhouette  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:55:46am

re: #125 bulwrk

"Sure the book is about how racism is wrong, but frankly, we haven't educated the kids very well so they are all too stupid to get that. Clearly the solution is banning the book. What? Educate the children? Now, that's just crazy talk."

166 Digital Display  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:55:53am

re: #151 Walter L. Newton

That was do to the influence of the Catholic Church and a local issue. My question is show me a book that the federal government has banned?


Well they should have banned 'I'm OK..Your OK' Just on General principles

167 FightingBack  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:55:59am

re: #155 CyanSnowHawk

I have to stand on the side that says you do not ban books.

Not in the USA, anyway.

168 realwest  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:56:03am

re: #145 keyword Uh, the Bill of Rights was made applicable to all State Governments as well under the 14th Amendment.

169 Ay, Caramba  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:56:06am

re: #132 so.cal.swede

You typed 'Obama'. Did you mean to type 'The Chosen One'?
- Spellchecker

I just use God.

170 SFGoth  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:56:28am

re: #163 so.cal.swede

.. although i'd rather have 1000 books banned for sexuality than 1 for political opinion.

I'd rather have 1 blocked for political opinion because that one would be the Koran. Problem solved.

171 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:56:37am

re: #164 zombie

upding.

172 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:56:57am

re: #145 keyword

I didn't say Federal government.

Banned indicates that printing the book would be against the law. Ok, tell me about ANY book that was banned from being published, printed, distributed or other wise.

There has been book that have been deemed not proper in certain situations, such as public libraries or schools, but you cannot equate having a book removed from a certain venue anywhere near the same as what Gert is proposing.

He is proposing that printing or owning a Quran is the same as printing or publishing or owning Mien Kaumpt.

173 Kragar  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:57:08am

re: #94 jorline

Why is it I never see Muslims prosecuted for hate speech?

Prosecuting a Muslim for hate speech will lead to a countersuit claiming religous persecution.

174 J.S.  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:57:17am

re: #134 Walter L. Newton

Banned book in the United States -- Tropic of Cancer, Miller. See list of other banned books here...

175 yma o hyd  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:57:20am

re: #133 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Censoring the Koran is not an answer.

Offering a point by point rebuttal on why it is wrong and why it should not be followed or why it leads to terrorism is not hate speech.

It is if you are a muslim!

No-one who is not an Arab scholar, trained in madrassahs and having studied in the Magic Kingdom is allowed to think and talk about the Qur'an - and translations, btw, are haram as well!

176 ThinkRight  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:57:21am

re: #14 realwest

Charles: "This prosecution is disgusting and wrong, but it’s difficult to cast Wilders as an icon of free speech when he explicitly advocates taking away the rights of others."
Yeah, sorta like Lefties here: freedom of expression for me, but not for thee.
Thank God that the US has the Bill of Rights.


For the moment probably

177 LGoPs  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:57:27am

re: #157 Sharmuta

I don't like the hate-speech laws in europe. What they are doing to Mr. Wilders is wrong.

But his proposed "solutions" are just as wrong.

Thank God my ancestors left that continent. God Bless America.

That continent is becoming incontinent........
/

178 realwest  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:57:35am

Outta here for lunch! Hope you all have a great day and that I get the chance to see you all down the road!

179 albusteve  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:57:49am

re: #166 HoosierHoops

Well they should have banned 'I'm OK..Your OK' Just on General principles

and anything written by Jimmy Carter for the same reasons!.....

just kidding

180 2by2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:57:52am

re: #173 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Prosecuting a Muslim for hate speech will lead to a countersuit claiming religous persecution.

...or in a public beheading?
/

181 so.cal.swede  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:58:08am

re: #170 SFGoth

I'd rather have 1 blocked for political opinion because that one would be the Koran. Problem solved.

Heey.. just like in that one movie with pouty-lips McGee.

182 Opinionated  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:58:32am

re: #156 karmic_inquisitor

This all goes back to the European inability to have a balanced, open debate on controversial issues.

Or it may be that Europeans are just scared to death of the Muslims in their midst and are prepared to sacrifice individuals to the volcano that can erupt at any moment.

183 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:58:48am

Stupid question here, maybe:

Does refusing to have one of your books reprinted count as banning?

I'm specifically thinking of Winter Soldier, by John Kerry.
You simply could not get a copy of that as of the 2004 election.
Kerry campaign purchased all known remaining copies.

184 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:58:54am

re: #172 Walter L. Newton

He is proposing that printing or owning a Quran is the same as printing or publishing or owning Mien Kaumpt.

Why ban Mein Kaumpt? We just "distributed" Prairie Fire right here on LGF.

185 KibbyKat  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:59:06am

re: #173 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Yeah, ask Mark Steyn what happens if you even quote them.

186 martinsmithy  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:59:13am

Either Wilders is a zealot who really wants to "burn books" (in this case the Koran) or he is a cynical politician who doesn't really believe what he says.

Either way, it's not a pretty picture.

And my understanding is that Wilders isn't in the same anti-semitic boat as Vlaams Belang, the BNP, the French National Front, etc. Is this correct?

187 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:59:32am

re: #177 LGoPs

I always enjoy when my typos get pointed out.

188 zombie  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:59:40am

re: #184 faraway

Why ban Mein Kaumpt? We just "distributed" Prairie Fire right here on LGF.

Oops, that was my fault. Sorry!

189 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:59:44am

re: #153 notutopia

Book banning
[Link: www.answers.com...]

"Book Banning has existed in America since colonial times, when legislatures and royal governors enacted laws against blasphemy and seditious libel. Legislatures in the early American republic passed laws against obscenity. "

Colonial, royal governors, obscenity laws, all pre-constitution or local community standards.

I want to know the name of a book that has been made illegal to publish, own, read etc, by our federal government.

I'm not suggest that there isn't one, I just can't find it.

190 Randall Gross  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:59:50am

re: #153 notutopia

Book banning
[Link: www.answers.com...]

When the banned Desmond Morris' "The Naked Ape" I immediately went out and bought two copies. Bans are counterproductive, especially in this day and age where information knows few bounds due to the internet and compact data sources.

191 Dustyvet  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 10:59:50am

re: #183 jwb7605

Stupid question here, maybe:

Does refusing to have one of your books reprinted count as banning?

I'm specifically thinking of Winter Soldier, by John Kerry.
You simply could not get a copy of that as of the 2004 election.
Kerry campaign purchased all known remaining copies.

I had one, it got shredded six times by and three by the cat...:)

192 formercorpsman  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:00:07am

re: #150 Lizard by the Bay

THAT is a very interesting perspective.

193 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:00:27am

re: #174 J.S.

Banned book in the United States -- Tropic of Cancer, Miller. See list of other banned books here...

That answers my question.

194 yma o hyd  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:00:33am

re: #147 so.cal.swede

Right, and what was Voltaire? The biggest critic of the European civilization of his time, ranking among the top critics of all time. He knew what was up, as did the founders of America, that's why they left in the first place.

You completely misunderstood me, I didn't say "all europeans are bad people" i said "We shouldn't be surprised that europeans call for book bannings, because their governments ban books every day".

Ahem.
I'm unaware of any books banned here in the UK, or France.
I'm sure you can come up with some titles which have been banned by European Governments?
There must be some, if they do this on a daily basis.

195 Lee Coller  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:00:53am

re: #183 jwb7605

Stupid question here, maybe:

Does refusing to have one of your books reprinted count as banning?

I'm specifically thinking of Winter Soldier, by John Kerry.
You simply could not get a copy of that as of the 2004 election.
Kerry campaign purchased all known remaining copies.

No, were specifically talking about making it illegal (i.e., you go to jail or pay a fine) for owning or distributing a particular book. Kerry, as the copyright holder certainly had the right not to continue to reprint his book even if his motives were questionable.

196 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:00:55am

re: #146 realwest

Kindly note, from your link: "Banned in the USA in 1821 for obscenity, then again in 1963. This was the last book ever banned in the USA.[3] "
emphasis added realwest.

Why bother getting a formal ban when you can just enlist the PC squads to condemn it and apply pressure to do a vigilante ban.

197 unreconstructed rebel  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:00:58am

re: #190 Thanos

When the banned Desmond Morris' "The Naked Ape" I immediately went out and bought two copies. Bans are counterproductive, especially in this day and age where information knows few bounds due to the internet and compact data sources.

Banned? Really? By whom & why?

198 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:01:00am

re: #193 Walter L. Newton

That answers my question.

Ok, that's what I was looking for, that answered my question.

199 Digital Display  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:01:02am

re: #188 zombie

Oops, that was my fault. Sorry!

BIG ZOMBIE IS RIPPING US OFF!

200 Silhouette  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:01:10am

I don't want Mein Kampf banned. Know thy enemy.

201 jorline  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:01:21am

re: #105 so.cal.swede

I up-dinged you, but to be honest. There's a radio station in Sweden, Radio Islam, that constantly used to be slapped with hate speech judgements because of it's frequent and fervent jew-hatred.

Swede, my wife was an exchange student in Sweden. The wife and kids went back three years ago for a couple of weeks.

202 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:01:23am
203 albusteve  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:01:35am

re: #190 Thanos

When the banned Desmond Morris' "The Naked Ape" I immediately went out and bought two copies. Bans are counterproductive, especially in this day and age where information knows few bounds due to the internet and compact data sources.

don't see this movie!...there is too much explicit SEX!....

204 Born_to_lose  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:01:39am

This is what ruffles my feathers...
...If Geert Wilders is being charged with Hate Speech, though Fitna was basically images of angry and violent muslims accompanied by QUOTES FROM THE Qur'an, then, shouldn't the Qur'an be considered the devil's advocate here in this case, and therefore be outlawed? If the QUOTES FROM THE DOCTRINE incite hate and violence towawrds People of the Book (Jews and Christians), Pagans, non believers, gays, hindus, buddhists, etc, then WHY are we allowing the distribution OF A HATE FILLED BOOK? Come on people! This is a case of the world turned on it's ever loving head. You can ding me down as much as you'd like, folks, but seriously, when WRONG, or hate speech/doctrine, is protected for being exposed as it stands, and RIGHT, or truth, is being charged with a crime for being HONEST, then we are looking at a world gone mad!

205 Dustyvet  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:01:48am

How to raise a family the Koranic way

Shut it Dusty, shut it...:)

206 LGoPs  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:02:03am

re: #187 Sharmuta

I always enjoy when my typos get pointed out.

No, you didn't spell anything wrong. I was just trying to make a rye (sic) comment....
:)

207 unreconstructed rebel  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:02:27am

re: #200 Silhouette

I don't want Mein Kampf banned. Know thy enemy.

Correct. That is a journey that needs not revisiting.

208 David IV of Georgia  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:02:27am

Banning the Koran is problematic. It has quite a few passages that seem quite hateful and potentially dangerous to those of us who have no intention of submitting to Islam.

However, were it banned, it is fairly likely that someone would call for the banning of the Bible on similar grounds. It is probable that someone who dislikes the Bible can find a "church" or two somewhere that interprets the Bible in ways that seem hateful and dangerous.

You would have to create biased legislation that specifically targets the Koran. Most Western countries frown on overtly biased legislation.

209 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:02:33am

re: #189 Walter L. Newton

"Book Banning has existed in America since colonial times, when legislatures and royal governors enacted laws against blasphemy and seditious libel. Legislatures in the early American republic passed laws against obscenity. "

Colonial, royal governors, obscenity laws, all pre-constitution or local community standards.

I want to know the name of a book that has been made illegal to publish, own, read etc, by our federal government.

I'm not suggest that there isn't one, I just can't find it.

You missed my last post?!

Fanny Hill or Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure -- Banned in the USA in 1821 for obscenity, then again in 1963. This was the last book ever banned in the USA.[3] See also Memoirs v. Massachusetts.

faraway's link #127

210 Kragar  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:02:35am

re: #166 HoosierHoops

Well they should have banned 'I'm OK..Your OK' Just on General principles

I prefer "I'm OK, You can fuck right off". Much better book.

211 Dustyvet  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:02:40am

re: #206 LGoPs

No, you didn't spell anything wrong. I was just trying to make a rye (sic) comment....
:)

That's wheat of you...:)

212 rightside  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:02:43am

Women are like phones:

They like to be held, talked to, and touched often.

But push the wrong button and your ass is disconnected.

213 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:02:52am

The Bible is banned in schools.

214 Silhouette  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:02:58am

re: #174 J.S.

Some of those are chuckle-worthy, despite the fact that "it's not funny because it really happened.

Black Beauty Was banned in South Africa in 1955 because of the use of the word 'black' in the title.
215 Outrider  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:03:04am

re: #104 Walter L. Newton

Name me one book that was banned by the federal government?

Fannie Hill (Twice)

216 Lincolntf  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:03:14am

re: #151 Walter L. Newton

I know what you're point was, and I told you that I don't think any book has ever been banned by the Feds (it's such a patently un-Constitutional notion that no reasonable person could ever expect it to be approved by any Court).
But State Governments, as I'm sure you know, have banned books many times.

217 zombie  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:03:20am

re: #189 Walter L. Newton

"Book Banning has existed in America since colonial times, when legislatures and royal governors enacted laws against blasphemy and seditious libel. Legislatures in the early American republic passed laws against obscenity. "

Colonial, royal governors, obscenity laws, all pre-constitution or local community standards.

I want to know the name of a book that has been made illegal to publish, own, read etc, by our federal government.

I'm not suggest that there isn't one, I just can't find it.

That's because they'e not "famous" books like the Quran or Tropic of Cancer or Howl. They're unknown books containing images of little children being abused. They're crazy rants written by a schizophrenic accusing innocent stalking victims of heinous crimes. You don't know about such books because they don't get any publicity. But there are hundreds, if not thousands, of them.

218 brookly red  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:03:25am

re: #190 Thanos

When the banned Desmond Morris' "The Naked Ape" I immediately went out and bought two copies. Bans are counterproductive, especially in this day and age where information knows few bounds due to the internet and compact data sources.

Good point, I can't think of anything banned that is not available for a price...

219 experiencedtraveller  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:03:27am

Sambos!

/Political correctness messing with my burger...

220 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:03:45am

re: #204 Born_to_lose

... then we are looking at a world gone mad!

By George, I think he's got it!

221 Charles Johnson  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:03:51am

re: #164 zombie

But it just is not possible to sell the idea that the primary religious text of one of the world's largest religions is the equivalent of child porn. I've read the Koran, and I know very well what's in it -- but anyone who says it should be banned is taking an extreme, untenable position.

The legal argument from the European standpoint is that since Mein Kampf is banned in many European countries, it should also be possible to ban the Koran, and that might be true -- in Europe. But Mein Kampf isn't banned in the US, and it shouldn't be. Extremist ideologies should be exposed, not censored and driven underground. The European model for this is wrong, unjust, and ultimately self-defeating.

In any case, this isn't the only reason Wilders is being prosecuted -- it seems to be more about the film 'Fitna.'

222 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:03:53am

re: #164 zombie

Child pornography, for example, is banned in America. Just try publishing a child porn book and see how long it remained unbanned and you remain unjailed.

In order for a book of child pornography to be made, a child must first be sexually violated.

223 Jantjepietje  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:03:57am

Geert Wilders has contradicted himself on this issue a lot of times.
One moment he is saying that muslims calling for a sharia have the right to do so and the other he changed his mind and wants the koran outlawed.
I think these statements came when he needed more media attention and started giving more and more extreme statements. It's sad really.

224 Randall Gross  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:03:59am

re: #197 unreconstructed rebel

Banned? Really? By whom & why?

Banned by the backdoor method of the Comstock Act - basically prohibited interstate shipment of banned books.

225 Born_to_lose  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:04:05am

re: #213 faraway

Thank you!

226 Guanxi88  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:04:11am

Here's one of those cases roughly equivalent - albeit with a few important differences - to the Spanish Civil War. Ideally, both sides should lose, and they should slug it out for as long as possible, at as great a cost as possible.

227 Outrider  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:04:36am

re: #104 Walter L. Newton

Name me one book that was banned by the federal government?

The Federal Mafia by Irwin Schiff

228 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:04:47am

re: #217 zombie

That's because they'e not "famous" books like the Quran or Tropic of Cancer or Howl. They're unknown books containing images of little children being abused. They're crazy rants written by a schizophrenic accusing innocent stalking victims of heinous crimes. You don't know about such books because they don't get any publicity. But there are hundreds, if not thousands, of them.

re: #215 Outrider

Fannie Hill (Twice)

That's the answers I have been asking for. Thanks!

I moving to a deserted Island.

229 Born_to_lose  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:04:57am

re: #220 Walter L. Newton

She. I am a SHE, thank you. And thanks very little for the cherry picking of my argument. I guess you are contributing to the whole "world gonr mad" idea...

230 formercorpsman  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:04:59am

This is why LGF is such an excellent resource.

A decent group of people opining as to the pro & con of this situation.

I have read a couple of good arguments on both sides of the coin, and it certainly forcing me to think about the topic.

231 J.S.  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:05:02am

re: #193 Walter L. Newton

There have been quite a number of books banned in Canada (that's around the 1960s - 1970s), especially anything deemed "pornographic"...and Canada Customs would inspect and destroy certain titles entering the country (seized at the border)...

232 Silhouette  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:05:20am

re: #213 faraway

The Bible is banned in schools.

All public schools?

233 Kosh's Shadow  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:05:34am

re: #206 LGoPs

No, you didn't spell anything wrong. I was just trying to make a rye (sic) comment....
:)

Wheat a while, and you'll figure it out. Just don't get lost in a maize.
Nobody's stalking you.

234 notutopia  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:06:01am

re: #189 Walter L. Newton

"Book Banning has existed in America since colonial times, when legislatures and royal governors enacted laws against blasphemy and seditious libel. Legislatures in the early American republic passed laws against obscenity. "

Colonial, royal governors, obscenity laws, all pre-constitution or local community standards.

I want to know the name of a book that has been made illegal to publish, own, read etc, by our federal government.

I'm not suggest that there isn't one, I just can't find it.

re: #190 Thanos

When the banned Desmond Morris' "The Naked Ape" I immediately went out and bought two copies. Bans are counterproductive, especially in this day and age where information knows few bounds due to the internet and compact data sources.

Banning doesn't define the availability or access to works that were deemed either seditious to the government or to obscenity. They're still available. Someone still owns/holds copies. You just won't find them in the checkout at the Federal Libraries.

235 zombie  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:06:42am

re: #222 MandyManners

In order for a book of child pornography to be made, a child must first be sexually violated.

Yes, but the crime most often is committed outside the US jurisdiction in a foreign country.

It is a crime to merely publish a photograph of child molestation -- over and above the crime of the molestation itself.

236 Born_to_lose  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:06:45am

re: #222 MandyManners

She was. Her name was Aisha. and she was 9 when Muhammad consumated the marriage...

237 yma o hyd  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:06:50am

re: #164 zombie

You put it in a nutshell, zombie.

I hope and believe that for Wilders, it is indeed about opening a discussion for everybody about what the Qur'an says, and not about an administrative ban, without discussion - because the people are too dumb to understand.

Personally, I think the more we discuss openly what the Qur'an says - without being accused of 'hate speech' by jihadists and 'moderate' muslims, the better.

The constant confusion ebtween what we in the West udnerstand by 'truce', and what Muslims udnerstand by it is just one example why such a discussion is needed.

238 Outrider  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:07:03am

I've been googling this, and surprisingly enough there are books banned by the Federal government that are not pornography.

239 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:07:13am

re: #231 J.S.

There have been quite a number of books banned in Canada (that's around the 1960s - 1970s), especially anything deemed "pornographic"...and Canada Customs would inspect and destroy certain titles entering the country (seized at the border)...

As I said a number of times above, thanks for the info. I wasn't aware that there ever was a outright federal ban on any book.

I stand enlightened.

240 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:07:27am
241 Kosh's Shadow  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:07:52am

re: #208 David IV of Georgia

Banning the Koran is problematic. It has quite a few passages that seem quite hateful and potentially dangerous to those of us who have no intention of submitting to Islam.

However, were it banned, it is fairly likely that someone would call for the banning of the Bible on similar grounds. It is probable that someone who dislikes the Bible can find a "church" or two somewhere that interprets the Bible in ways that seem hateful and dangerous.

You would have to create biased legislation that specifically targets the Koran. Most Western countries frown on overtly biased legislation.

I agree that the Koran shouldn't be banned. But in some place where "hate speech" laws are used against those who point out that terrroism and Islam are connected, then the same laws should be used, if not against the Koran, against the hate literature in the radical mosques.

242 formercorpsman  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:08:03am

Seriously, this is interesting.

One aspect of this argument, I do not like the fact that books such as Alms for Jihad have been banned.

Keep typing, this is good stuff.

243 notutopia  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:08:33am

re: #212 rightside

Women are like phones:

They like to be held, talked to, and touched often.

But push the wrong button and your ass is disconnected.

rightside are you having a bad, gender related day?

244 Lincolntf  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:09:06am

re: #238 Outrider

Unreal. I guess we're not nearly as free as we think we are.
I just looked at some of the links (everything from Henry Miller to DH Lawrence). Did nobody (publisher, author?) ever challenge these bans in a Fed. Court?

245 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:09:28am

re: #202 buzzsawmonkey

I think the speech laws as well as his proposal for dealing with islam in The Netherlands are both wrong. I'm not saying I have no sympathy for him, just that it's low. He's raised serious questions in my mind about his character by calling the koran fascist on the one hand, then befriending neo-fascist sympathizers and contemplating an alliance whit neo-fascist political parties. He recognizes the fascism in one but not the other- that's troubling to me.

Again- what the Dutch courts are doing is wrong. But his rhetoric is no better.

246 rightside  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:09:29am

Not at all. Just thought I would post something humorous. Call it a palate cleanser.

247 Silhouette  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:09:33am

I hope the fact that we are debating Geert's stance on banning the koran means that we are all agreed on the outrage of the trial and so found something else to hash about. And that it doesn't mean that some think that maybe the Dutch have a point in trying him, because of his call for banning a book.

248 IslandLibertarian  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:09:36am

Don't BAN the Koran.
Publish a book highlighting the objectionable material in the Koran.
Do the same with any other book you don't like.

If book are banned, only criminals will have books.

249 unreconstructed rebel  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:09:36am

re: #224 Thanos

Banned by the backdoor method of the Comstock Act - basically prohibited interstate shipment of banned books.

Took a quick peek at your link. Applying the Comstock Act to The Naked Ape is certainly a stretch. Wow.

250 Digital Display  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:09:45am

re: #231 J.S.

There have been quite a number of books banned in Canada (that's around the 1960s - 1970s), especially anything deemed "pornographic"...and Canada Customs would inspect and destroy certain titles entering the country (seized at the border)...


That's funny..Cause they have never found the Cubans Cigars we sneak in country..Why look at book titles?
LOL

251 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:09:57am

re: #37 buzzsawmonkey

Excellent point, BZM! The Nazis banned and burned books. Fitna should be required viewing for all EU members. It was said, when the Hate Speech laws were passed, that Muslims would be the benefactors. There they go again!

252 Spare O'Lake  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:10:18am
Gaza Strip smuggling tunnels operating despite IDF offensive

Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni headed to Brussels where Israeli officials said she hoped to clinch a deal committing the EU to contribute forces, ships and technology to stop arms smuggling to Hamas.

EU officials said it was too early for that, saying providing humanitarian relief and efforts to secure a lasting cease-fire were their priorities.

Doesn't the EU response just say it all?
Those sons of bitches.

253 LGoPs  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:10:18am

re: #233 Kosh's Shadow

Wheat a while, and you'll figure it out. Just don't get lost in a maize.
Nobody's stalking you.

Maize as in corn? Hominy corns are we talkin' about?

254 FightingBack  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:10:20am

re: #202 buzzsawmonkey

I think I get this. Although you oppose book-bans, you uphold his right to voice his opinion that a book should be banned. Freedom of speech applies to those who call for its destruction, too.

255 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:10:23am

re: #235 zombie

Yes, but the crime most often is committed outside the US jurisdiction in a foreign country.

It is a crime to merely publish a photograph of child molestation -- over and above the crime of the molestation itself.

It should remain a crime to publish or even distribute such a book. It furthers a crime.

256 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:10:27am

re: #227 Outrider

The Federal Mafia by Irwin Schiff

The book is not banned, there is an injunction against certain sellers.

On August 9, 2004, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an injunction issued by a U.S. District Court in Nevada under 26 U.S.C. § 7408 against Irwin Schiff and associates Cynthia Neun and Lawrence Cohen, against the sale of this book by those persons.[14] This prohibition does not extend to other sellers of the book.

Once again the Ninth is mucking about.

257 Outrider  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:10:32am

re: #244 Lincolntf

Unreal. I guess we're not nearly as free as we think we are.
I just looked at some of the links (everything from Henry Miller to DH Lawrence). Did nobody (publisher, author?) ever challenge these bans in a Fed. Court?

All of the bans have been overturned, with the possible exception of The Federal Mafia and I'm still looking at that one.

They were all challenged and overturned.

258 nyc redneck  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:11:00am

i'm wondering when/if leftists will see that pandering to and coddling the worst and most dangerous scum in society is just plain wrong.
there is no place for cowardice in the world today. w/ such a dangerous foe on the horizon.
and i'm so hoping that phony pc intellectualism won't trump our basic sense of survival for ever.
or until evil prevails and rules.
time to wake up and prevent that bleak possibility.
not to gloss over it and persecute the messenger.

259 notutopia  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:11:08am

re: #246 rightside

Not at all. Just thought I would post something humorous. Call it a palate cleanser.

Consider your palate cleansed.

260 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:11:10am

re: #236 Born_to_lose

She was. Her name was Aisha. and she was 9 when Muhammad consumated the marriage...

There are photographs/drawings of molestation in the Koran?

261 IslandLibertarian  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:11:20am

re: #213 faraway

The Bible is banned in schools.

You mean if I go into any public school library, there will not be a Bible there?
Are you sure about that?

262 Silhouette  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:11:42am

re: #254 FightingBack

Freedom of speech applies to those who call for its destruction, too.

Absolutely.

263 CyanSnowHawk  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:11:54am

re: #203 albusteve

don't see this movie!...there is too much explicit SEX!....

A 1973 movie directed by Donald Driver — based on the book — was made starring Johnny Crawford and Victoria Principal.

Victoria Principal, in 1973, in a movie with too much explicit sex? That's a selling point albusteve, not a detriment.

264 Jantjepietje  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:11:56am

re: #37 buzzsawmonkey

Drawing a parallel between the Koran and Hitler's Mein Kampf, which is banned in Germany (don't know if it is also banned in the Netherlands) is the strongest and most direct way he can do this, given the apparent level of "hate-speech" restrictions in Europe.

Mein Kampf is not banned in germany the state simply owns the copyright to the book and uses copyright laws to prevent the book from being reprinted and sold in bookstores.
The same goes for the Netherlands where the dutch state has the copyright of the dutch translation of Mein Kampf.

265 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:12:08am
266 Charles Johnson  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:12:22am

re: #213 faraway

The Bible is banned in schools.

That's not true.

267 Lincolntf  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:12:35am

re: #257 Outrider

Oh good, now I don't have to look up the resolutions for myself.
It really is amazing, though, that lawmakers even tried. Had they never read the Constitution?

268 yma o hyd  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:12:38am

re: #221 Charles

If it really is more about his film FITNA - then good luck!

I wonder who is funding the entities who ahve brought this law suit?

Magic Kingdom, anyone?

269 zombie  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:12:46am

re: #221 Charles

But it just is not possible to sell the idea that the primary religious text of one of the world's largest religions is the equivalent of child porn. I've read the Koran, and I know very well what's in it -- but anyone who says it should be banned is taking an extreme, untenable position.

Fine -- but then the punishment for Gilders should be losing the next election because no one agrees with him -- or, similarly, being made into a political outcast with whom no one will make alliances. It ought not to be a crime to discuss the possibility of banning a book.

The legal argument from the European standpoint is that since Mein Kampf is banned, it should also be possible to ban the Koran, and that might be true -- in Europe. But Mein Kampf isn't banned in the US, and it shouldn't be. Extremist ideologies should be exposed, not censored and driven underground. The European model for this is wrong, unjust, and ultimately self-defeating.

Oh, I agree -- I'm not in favor of book banning myself. I'm 100% pro-freedom of expression, and I personally would never ban the Quran or Mein Kampf or anything else. I was just pointing out that we do in fact ban books right not all the time, but this detail never gets discussed.

In any case, this isn't the only reason Wilders is being prosecuted -- it seems to be more about the film 'Fitna.'

Which is even more outrageous. By those standards -- imprisoning someone for making a biased semi-documentary film -- Michael Moore would be in solitary confinement for the next thousand years, along with Al Gore and Morgan Spurlock.

270 Outrider  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:13:10am

re: #256 FurryOldGuyJeans

Once again the Ninth is mucking about.

yes, see my 257.

March 19, 2003, Federal Judge Lloyd George ordered Schiff to stop selling his book. Period. That was overturned and is now as you stated. Thanks.

271 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:13:10am
272 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:13:13am

re: #254 FightingBack

I think I get this. Although you oppose book-bans, you uphold his right to voice his opinion that a book should be banned. Freedom of speech applies to those who call for its destruction, too.

If I can jump in here, in my opinion, yes.

273 2by2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:13:14am

re: #202 buzzsawmonkey

Buzz,
I up-dinged you for that excellent reasoning.
Not having grown up in the light of the first amendment, I know first hand what it means to live without it.
Though one has to look at Europe's violent history and the long tradition of seeing most things through a tribal lens, ideas are never really discussed as ideas in Europe, it's more a Machiavellian thing were it is ultimately about power, and the ruling party/tribe will oppress the opposition. Lately Europe has become more 'civil', and overbearing in it's ways to bend over backwards for tolerance and MultiCulturism. Europe at this point is like a giant seesaw of tolerance-intolerance.

274 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:13:22am

re: #261 IslandLibertarian

You mean if I go into any public school library, there will not be a Bible there?
Are you sure about that?

It is a school district variable. I would think a safe bet would be "nearly all" public school libraries, because of the fear of lawsuits. (On a separation of church/state canard)

275 Charles Johnson  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:13:39am

re: #264 Jantjepietje

Mein Kampf is not banned in germany the state simply owns the copyright to the book and uses copyright laws to prevent the book from being reprinted and sold in bookstores.

The same goes for the Netherlands where the dutch state has the copyright of the dutch translation of Mein Kampf.

That's interesting. Didn't know that - I thought there were laws explicitly banning the book.

276 Kragar  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:13:41am

re: #213 faraway

The Bible is banned in schools.

We used it in my history and my English class. Sure it was 20 years ago.

277 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:13:58am

Banned commercial in the US has a great lesson in it though

278 FightingBack  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:14:00am

re: #255 MandyManners

It should remain a crime to publish or even distribute such a book. It furthers a crime.

I agree. Accessory after the fact.

279 KibbyKat  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:14:08am

re: #253 LGoPs

Maize as in corn? Hominy corns are we talkin' about?

What do you have to grain from carrying on like this?

280 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:14:10am

re: #272 Walter L. Newton

If I can jump in here, in my opinion, yes.

I thought you were moving to a deserted island! :)

281 Born_to_lose  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:14:17am

re: #260 MandyManners

Sorry, then it is, and equally as disgusting, erotic child 'literature'. F**king filth. And, um, thanks to that LITTLE portion of the Qur'an, powerful imams in Saudi Arabia think that TEN YEAR OLDS are of the prime age for marriage!

282 Randall Gross  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:14:32am

Variations of the Comstock Law are still out there, the fact that the law almost always gets over-ruled in favor of free speech doesn't mean that zero books have been banned in the US.
Comstock law:

The pioneer of modern American censorship was Anthony Comstock, who founded the New York Society for the Suppression of Vice in 1872. In 1873, using slogans such as “Morals, not art and literature,” he convinced Congress to pass a law, thereafter known as the “Comstock Law,” banning the mailing of materials found to be “lewd, indecent, filthy or obscene.” Between 1874 and 1915, as special agent of the U.S. Post Office, he is estimated to have confiscated 120 tons of printed works. Under his reign, 3,500 people were prosecuted although only about 350 were convicted. Books banned by Comstock included many classics: Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales, The Arabian Nights, and Aristophanes’ Lysistrata. Authors whose works were subsequently censored under the Comstock Law include Ernest Hemingway, James Joyce, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Victor Hugo, D.H. Lawrence, John Steinbeck, Eugene O’Neill and many others whose works are now deemed to be classics of literature

283 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:14:40am

re: #264 Jantjepietje

From wiki's Banned Books article regarding Mein Kampf:

Banned due to anti-Nazi laws. However, possession and sale for historical reasons is legal in Germany, Austria and the Netherlands

(emphasis added by me)

284 Lizard by the Bay  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:14:51am

re: #213 faraway

The Bible is banned in schools.

Prayer is banned in public schools, but my public high school had several Korans, Torahs, and yes, Bibles in the school library. No one can reasonably claim to understand World History without being exposed to world religion, and its place in shaping it.

285 J.S.  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:14:52am

re: #218 brookly red

but, wait a second, there was a case of a book banning (in the UK) in which some Saudi (?), wealthy one, who didn't like a certain book because of allegations about his family -- and he got the book not only banned, but removed from library book shelves in the UK -- he also insisted that publishers in the U.S. not publish the book, etc. (I believe this was fought vigourously in the U.S., and I don't think the Saudi (?) got his way...) There's an outfit protecting Freedom of Speech -- and it monitors these kind of book bannings, etc. (will have to get out my notes...)

286 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:15:19am

re: #275 Charles

That's interesting. Didn't know that - I thought there were laws explicitly banning the book.

That's why I asked the Winter Soldier question.

287 2by2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:16:15am

re: #275 Charles

That's interesting. Didn't know that - I thought there were laws explicitly banning the book.

I didn't know that either, though I know that Germany has draconian laws regarding any type of Nazi propaganda. I thought Mein Kampf is covered by that.

288 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:16:24am

re: #280 jwb7605

I thought you were moving to a deserted island! :)

Fine, I'll leave, in, let's say, 20 years. You'll see, you will all miss me when I'm gone.

289 Dianna  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:16:31am

re: #222 MandyManners

In order for a book of child pornography to be made, a child must first be sexually violated.

Yes.

Very much the point - it's based on a crime.

290 LGoPs  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:16:45am

re: #279 KibbyKat

What do you have to grain from carrying on like this?

This is getting ce-real.......

291 Dustyvet  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:17:06am

re: #250 HoosierHoops

That's funny..Cause they have never found the Cubans Cigars we sneak in country..Why look at book titles?
LOL

The best part is that when you smoke one, your burning the evidence...:)

292 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:17:34am

re: #285 J.S.

Rachel's law. Libel tourism.

293 infidel4ever  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:17:38am

re: #204 Born_to_lose

This is what ruffles my feathers...
...If Geert Wilders is being charged with Hate Speech, though Fitna was basically images of angry and violent muslims accompanied by QUOTES FROM THE Qur'an, then, shouldn't the Qur'an be considered the devil's advocate here in this case, and therefore be outlawed? If the QUOTES FROM THE DOCTRINE incite hate and violence towawrds People of the Book (Jews and Christians), Pagans, non believers, gays, hindus, buddhists, etc, then WHY are we allowing the distribution OF A HATE FILLED BOOK? Come on people! This is a case of the world turned on it's ever loving head. You can ding me down as much as you'd like, folks, but seriously, when WRONG, or hate speech/doctrine, is protected for being exposed as it stands, and RIGHT, or truth, is being charged with a crime for being HONEST, then we are looking at a world gone mad!

Muslims are allowed to spew as much hate as they want, because it is their religion. However, if we infidels point out that they are spewing hate speech, we are sued. See the problem?

Allowing Islam to spread unchecked in my country for 60 years has now resulted in Muslims demonstrating in the streets under the flags of terrorist organisations, calling for Jews to be put on the gas, fire bomb attacks on synagogues, etc. etc. As far as I am concerned Islam has not added one single positive thing to my country. Give me one good reason why we should let it spread some more?

294 Lizard by the Bay  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:17:45am

re: #289 Dianna

Yes.

Very much the point - it's based on a crime.

Worse. It's the furthering, the very continuation of said crime. The victim is being victimized so long as the images are being viewed and distributed.

295 Peter  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:18:00am

As far as I understand it, Wilders does not want to ban the Koran, he is claiming freedom of expression for himself. He is accused of hate crime, so the dutch attorneys.

296 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:18:09am

re: #288 Walter L. Newton

Fine, I'll leave, in, let's say, 20 years. You'll see, you will all miss me when I'm gone.

Probably. I was telling my wife about your (ex) girlfriend. She wants -- sometime in the future -- to drive down to Golden and see a play. She checked your web page, and pointed out that your play is several years old.

297 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:18:15am

Distributing Bibles, along with other forms of proselytizing by non-Muslims, is also banned in Saudi Arabia

298 nyc redneck  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:18:20am

wilders needs to stop trying to get the koran banned.
the contents of the koran should be known by everyone in the free world.
that book of hate is it's own worst enemy.
why hide information abt. what fuels the islamic jihadis.
quote it, quote it, quote it.
loudly.

299 Lee Coller  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:18:26am

re: #284 Lizard by the Bay

Prayer is banned in public schools, but my public high school had several Korans, Torahs, and yes, Bibles in the school library. No one can reasonably claim to understand World History without being exposed to world religion, and its place in shaping it.

That's actually not true either, any student is free to pray in a public school, in fact, any teacher is free to pray in a public school. What is banned is officially sanctioned prayer (i.e., spending class time for prayer, etc.)

300 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:18:38am
301 Guanxi88  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:18:41am

re: #290 LGoPs

This is getting ce-real.......

Please, these fruitless arguments! If you can't separate the wheat from the chaff, then why are you still flailing about so? True, certain larger points millet-ate against it, but isn't the ultimate goal one of hominy?

Kasha-mighty, people!

302 AuntAcid  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:18:45am

re: #228 Walter L. Newton

That's the answers I have been asking for. Thanks!

I moving to a deserted Island.

I'd prefer a dessert-ed island.

303 Charles Johnson  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:18:49am

re: #269 zombie

We're not really disagreeing. I think this prosecution is disgusting, as I wrote. But I strongly disagree with Wilders' call to ban the Koran.

304 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:18:54am
Is The Bible really banned in US public schools? Some claim it is, though most of the claims I've received in email have either not contained specifics or referred to cases that weren't bans, but instead cases where a state school had to stop advocacy or special treatment favoring the religious messages of the Bible. (Such preferential treatment by state-run schools conflicts with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.) However, sometimes schools may err in the other direction, restricting student's individual speech or reading preferences because of their religious nature (in conflict with the Free Exercise clause of the First Amendment). In a 1996 New Jersey case, a student selected by his teacher to choose a story to read to the class was told that he could not read the story he chose, once he announced that he had chosen the Biblical story of Jacob and Esau.
305 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:19:10am

re: #295 Peter

As far as I understand it, Wilders does not want to ban the Koran, he is claiming freedom of expression for himself. He is accused of hate crime, so the dutch attorneys.

No, he actually wants the Koran to be banned.

306 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:19:37am

re: #293 infidel4ever

Muslims are allowed to spew as much hate as they want, because it is their religion. However, if we infidels point out that they are spewing hate speech, we are sued. See the problem?

Allowing Islam to spread unchecked in my country for 60 years has now resulted in Muslims demonstrating in the streets under the flags of terrorist organisations, calling for Jews to be put on the gas, fire bomb attacks on synagogues, etc. etc. As far as I am concerned Islam has not added one single positive thing to my country. Give me one good reason why we should let it spread some more?

Because in our country we have freedom of religion. I know, that's hard for some Europeans to understand.

307 albusteve  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:19:41am

re: #263 CyanSnowHawk

A 1973 movie directed by Donald Driver — based on the book — was made starring Johnny Crawford and Victoria Principal.

Victoria Principal, in 1973, in a movie with too much explicit sex? That's a selling point albusteve, not a detriment.

that's exactly the point...

308 FightingBack  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:19:43am

I defend his right to call for banning.
I oppose the banning of the Quran
I oppose the teachings in the Quran.

Three opposing ideas in my head at once. Not a Lib.

309 zombie  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:19:53am

re: #269 zombie

we do in fact ban books right not all the time = we do in fact ban books right now all the time

PIMF

310 Silhouette  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:19:56am

re: #284 Lizard by the Bay

No one can reasonably claim to understand World History without being exposed to world religion, and its place in shaping it.

Which is why many people don't understand history.

There was a commercial a few years back that showed a history book with words disappearing. One of the examples was a sentence that said, "The Pilgrims gave thanks to God." and the words "to God" disappeared. I'm not sure it was supposed to illustrate an exact instance, but an overall trend.

311 infidel4ever  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:19:57am

re: #248 IslandLibertarian

Don't BAN the Koran.
Publish a book highlighting the objectionable material in the Koran.
blockquote>

He made a movie, Fitna, highlighting the objectionable material in the Koran. That is why he is going to be prosecuted.

312 KibbyKat  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:19:57am

re: #290 LGoPs

I know, I was just muesli-ing about it.

313 brookly red  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:20:00am

re: #285 J.S.
I seem to remember that too, lots of lawsuits... but the point is you can probably still get it on-line.

314 Gella  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:20:11am

you need to know who your enemies are, there is really no need to ban it, but it can be modified

315 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:20:19am

re: #308 FightingBack

I defend his right to call for banning.
I oppose the banning of the Quran
I oppose the teachings in the Quran.

Three opposing ideas in my head at once. Not a Lib.

Triplespeak!

316 LGoPs  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:20:39am

re: #301 Guanxi88

Please, these fruitless arguments! If you can't separate the wheat from the chaff, then why are you still flailing about so? True, certain larger points millet-ate against it, but isn't the ultimate goal one of hominy?
Kasha-mighty, people!

Beets me........

317 J.S.  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:21:04am

re: #292 WriterMom

Yes, that's it. I haven't kept up with this story...(lost all the ins-and-outs, etc.)

318 Ben Hur  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:21:24am
THE HAGUE - Ten people were arrested Sunday in the Netherlands during a protest against the violence in Gaza, while hundreds of demonstrators also took to the streets in Belgium, police said.

A Dutch police spokesperson told AFP nine of the 10 people arrested in The Hague were chanting "discriminatory slogans or waving flags with the Swastika on them." The 10th person was arrested for disobeying a police order.

Organisers said the protest attracted 6,000 people, but police put the figure at 2,000 people.

[Link: www.expatica.com...]

Balance!

319 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:21:25am
320 Kenneth  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:21:30am

re: #189 Walter L. Newton

Recently I saw a book about book banning in America. There were some books that were outright banned, however, most of the books were not so much banned as dropped from high-school reading libraries or reading lists. That's not the same thing as banned.

You want to find out about banned books? Try bringing a Bible into Saudi Arabia.

321 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:21:47am

re: #275 Charles

That's interesting. Didn't know that - I thought there were laws explicitly banning the book.

Interesting wiki extract from their Mein Kampf article regarding current availability:

At the time of his death, Hitler's official place of residence was in Munich, which led to his entire estate, including all rights to Mein Kampf, changing to the ownership of the state of Bavaria. As per German copyright law the entire text is scheduled to enter the public domain on December 31, 2015, 70 years after the author's death. The copyright has been relinquished for the English, Dutch and Swedish editions. Historian Werner Maser, in an interview with Bild am Sonntag has stated that Peter Raubal, son of Hitler's nephew, Leo Raubal, would have a strong legal case for winning the copyright from Bavaria if he pursued it. Peter Raubal, an Austrian engineer, has stated he wants no part of the rights to the book, even though it could be worth millions of euros.[7] The government of Bavaria, in agreement with the federal government of Germany, refuses to allow any copying or printing of the book in Germany, and opposes it also in other countries but with less success. Owning and buying the book is legal. Trading in old copies is legal as well unless it is done in such a fashion as to "promote hatred or war," which is, under anti-revisionist laws, generally illegal. In particular, the unmodified edition is not covered by &sect86 StGB that forbids dissemination of means of propaganda of unconstitutional organisations, since it is a "pre-constitutional work" and as such cannot be opposed to the free and democratic basic order, according to a 1979 decision of the Federal Court of Justice of Germany.[8] Most German libraries carry heavily commented and excerpted versions of Mein Kampf.

and

In the Netherlands, selling the book, even in the case of an old copy, may be illegal as "promoting hatred," but possession and lending is not, though mainly the matter is handled as a matter of copyright infringement as the Dutch state, as acclaimed owner of the translation, refuses to allow any publishing. In 1997, the government explained to the parliament that selling a scientifically annotated version might escape prosecution. In 2007, the discussion flared up again and the same arguments for and against as in 1997 were uttered. In 2015, the copyright on the Dutch translation becomes void.

322 doppelganglander  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:21:49am

re: #284 Lizard by the Bay

Prayer is banned in public schools, but my public high school had several Korans, Torahs, and yes, Bibles in the school library. No one can reasonably claim to understand World History without being exposed to world religion, and its place in shaping it.

My daughter's World Lit textbook included excerpts from the Torah, the New Testament, and the Koran. Amazingly, no one was offended.

323 Silhouette  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:21:50am

re: #250 HoosierHoops

That's funny..Cause they have never found the Cubans Cigars we sneak in country..Why look at book titles?
LOL

I felt like a smuggler for "sneaking" in 3 cuban cigars, then found out later that you're allowed to bring in a few for personal use.

324 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:22:08am

re: #317 J.S.

Rachel's Law and Libel Tourism

325 ixolite  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:22:09am

Sorry, if this has already has been posted, I didn't read all the comments.

There is a petition for him:
[Link: www.petitiononline.com...]

Btw, the Koran is a book which calls for the deaths of other people, so I don't think him wanting to ban it has much to do with him disagreeing with it.

326 Kosh's Shadow  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:22:14am

re: #279 KibbyKat

What do you have to grain from carrying on like this?

I thought I might get a flour.
I was my hops that this would continue; I barley got started.
Soy, what else is going on.

327 Kenneth  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:22:14am

re: #303 Charles

Absolutely. More people should read the Koran. It's a real eye-opener!

328 LGoPs  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:22:18am

BBIAW

329 KibbyKat  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:22:19am

re: #308 FightingBack

Obviously. If you were you'd only be able to deal with half an idea at any given time.

330 albusteve  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:22:21am

re: #276 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

We used it in my history and my English class. Sure it was 20 years ago.

we studied it in world lit in 1970....

331 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:22:33am

re: #208 David IV of Georgia

Banning the Koran is problematic. It has quite a few passages that seem quite hateful and potentially dangerous to those of us who have no intention of submitting to Islam.

However, were it banned, it is fairly likely that someone would call for the banning of the Bible on similar grounds. It is probable that someone who dislikes the Bible can find a "church" or two somewhere that interprets the Bible in ways that seem hateful and dangerous.

You would have to create biased legislation that specifically targets the Koran. Most Western countries frown on overtly biased legislation.

Surah 3: 155 "They muttered,'have we any say in matters of administration?' Tell them: all government belongs to Allah".
THEREFORE, any government NOT based on Sharia and the Qu'ran is wrong and should be overthrown. Sedition, anyone?

332 Gella  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:22:48am

re: #320 Kenneth

Recently I saw a book about book banning in America. There were some books that were outright banned, however, most of the books were not so much banned as dropped from high-school reading libraries or reading lists. That's not the same thing as banned.

You want to find out about banned books? Try bringing a Bible into Saudi Arabia.

you can probably bring Bible, but i am not sure about Torah

333 Guanxi88  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:22:58am

re: #316 LGoPs

Beets me........

Schi! these puns!

Proposed Manischevitz commercial tag-line:

Borscht! It can't be beet!

334 yma o hyd  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:23:16am

re: #292 WriterMom

Rachel's law. Libel tourism.

Thanks - you took the words out of my mouth.

Iirc - this 'banning' was to do with libel, and libel laws are notorious here in the UK, astronomical sums involved.

Mind - the 'best' libel lawyer died a year or so ago, methinks - we've not had any huge libel processes since ...

335 jcm  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:23:20am
If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.


- Sun Tzu

Banning the books an enemy uses as a guide denies us knowledge of the enemy, and therefore will deny us victory.

336 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:23:21am

re: #319 Iron Fist

The only guarantor of the 1st Amendment is the 2nd.

337 Silhouette  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:23:41am

re: #308 FightingBack

I defend his right to call for banning.
I oppose the banning of the Quran
I oppose the teachings in the Quran.

Three opposing ideas in my head at once. Not a Lib.

But they are not opposing. They are entirely consistent.

Freedom
Freedom
and Freedom.

338 Dustyvet  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:23:47am

re: #326 Kosh's Shadow

I thought I might get a flour.
I was my hops that this would continue; I barley got started.
Soy, what else is going on.

Stop your baking me out...

339 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:23:49am

re: #253 LGoPs

Maize as in corn? Hominy corns are we talkin' about?

Writing that post took True Grits!

340 Guanxi88  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:24:02am

re: #336 FurryOldGuyJeans

The only guarantor of the 1st Amendment is the 2nd.

I'd argue, and others have as well, that the 2nd is the guarantee clause of the other 8 as well.

341 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:24:03am

re: #298 nyc redneck

wilders needs to stop trying to get the koran banned.
the contents of the koran should be known by everyone in the free world.
that book of hate is it's own worst enemy.
why hide information abt. what fuels the islamic jihadis.
quote it, quote it, quote it.
loudly.

That's exactly what europeans DON'T understand. You don't ban books and impose hate-speech laws to stop vile ideologies- it fails when it's tried. The best remedy is exposure. Expose the hate, and it will be shunned as it should be. But bans merely drive it underground and give rise to coded methods of expressing the same vileness and thus nothing is remedied.

342 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:24:43am
343 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:24:46am

re: #320 Kenneth

Recently I saw a book about book banning in America. There were some books that were outright banned, however, most of the books were not so much banned as dropped from high-school reading libraries or reading lists. That's not the same thing as banned.

You want to find out about banned books? Try bringing a Bible into Saudi Arabia.

I'm well aware of the laws of the Magic Kingdom, my questioning was about the US.

I have no problem with certain books being removed from certain libraries, and private organizations and schools, and sometimes community can create rules or laws to keep certain publications or media from being distributed, but I would not agree to any federal ban of publishing anything that is legal.

Of course, child porn and other such material is considered illegal, as it should be.

344 infidel4ever  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:24:59am

re: #306 Walter L. Newton

Freedom of religion is fine. But Islam is more than just a believe system, it is a way of life that overrules all else. Besides, look at the freedom of religion in Islamic countries. Keep giving Islam the space to grow in the US and eventually you will end up like Saoudi-Arabia. Islam only. It is the nature of Islam.

345 Silhouette  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:25:18am

re: #320 Kenneth

most of the books were not so much banned as dropped from high-school reading libraries or reading lists. That's not the same thing as banned.

Every year they trot out the banned book list, and most of the books on that list fall under that category.

346 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:25:53am

re: #300 buzzsawmonkey

I support the principle of free speech, so that's as far as my support for him in this goes.

347 unreconstructed rebel  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:25:54am

re: #336 FurryOldGuyJeans

The only guarantor of the 1st Amendment is the 2nd.

It's a pity more people don't want to understand that. Having to place myself at the mercy of an attorney with an agenda just doesn't get it.

348 Kenneth  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:25:59am

re: #332 Gella

Nope. The Bible is officially banned in Saudi Arabia. So are crucifixes and teddy bears.

Indeed, the Saudi government desecrates and burns Bibles that its security forces confiscate at immigration points into the kingdom or during raids on Christian expatriates worshiping privately.

Although considered as holy in Islam and mentioned in the Quran dozens of times, the Bible is banned in Saudi Arabia. This would seem curious to most people because of the fact that to most Muslims, the Bible is a holy book. But when it comes to Saudi Arabia we are not talking about most Muslims, but a tiny minority of hard-liners who constitute the Wahhabi Sect.

The Bible in Saudi Arabia may get a person killed, arrested, or deported. In September 1993, Sadeq Mallallah, 23, was beheaded in Qateef on a charge of apostasy for owning a Bible.

349 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:26:01am
350 zombie  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:26:11am

re: #308 FightingBack

I defend his right to call for banning.
I oppose the banning of the Quran
I oppose the teachings in the Quran.

Three opposing ideas in my head at once. Not a Lib.

Nice, concise summation of my opinions as well.

There are three different issues going on in this case, and our seemingly-conflicting opinions about them make sense to us, though perhaps not to the general liberal-or-conservative hardliners.

It's the nuanced LGF view!

351 doppelganglander  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:26:17am

re: #332 Gella

you can probably bring Bible, but i am not sure about Torah

Nope, no Bibles. Flight attendants, for example, are warned about wearing crosses and carrying Bibles on flights to the Magic Kingdom. For foreign workers living in compounds, they kind of look the other way, but the official policy is no Bibles.

352 Arrr  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:26:40am

You know what? As horrifying as this is, it's just another symptom of Europe being Europe. The whole history of Europe (with some exception) is basically illiberal bad guys vs illiberal bad guys - one group of people trying to trample on the rights of another. Scum who want to ban the hijab versus scum who want to force everyone to wear it on pain of death. Multicultural fascists vs Euro fascists vs Islamic fascists. Nazis vs Communists. Ethnicity against ethnicity. Tribe against tribe. The one thing that these idiots have in common is anti-semitism and contempt for individual rights. Eventually Europe will learn its lesson, but expect things to get much, much worse before they get better.

353 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:26:42am

re: #331 NelsFree

Sedition, anyone?

According to Black's Law Dictionary, sedition is an agreement, communication or other preliminary activity aimed at inciting treason or som lesser commotion against public authority.

354 lawhawk  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:26:50am

re: #275 Charles

There are specific German laws that apply as well:

Article (51) of Germany's Basic Code states that a citizen's right to free speech cannot be used to conflict with another's right to "personal dignity." As a result, the German criminal code condemns the making of racial insults (Art. 130), the writing or disseminating of works that incite racial hatred (Art. 131), and the trivializing or denial of Nazi atrocities such as the Holocaust (Art. 194). As a practical matter, no such activity could be made criminal in this country.

Also, apparently the German government does not own the copyright, Bavaria does. It holds copyright as per German copyright law until 2015, 70 years after the death of Hitler, when it becomes available under public domain .

355 MJ  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:26:53am

OT:

Obama stresses commitment to stop Hamas arms smuggling
By Eric Fingerhut · January 21, 2009

WASHINGTON (JTA) -- President Barack Obama told Ehud Olmert and three other Middle East leaders he is determined to stop Hamas from smuggling arms.

According to a statement from White House press secretary Robert Gibbs, the new president placed phone calls Wednesday morning to Olmert, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and King Adullah of Jordan.

The statement said that Obama "emphasized his determination to work to help consolidate the cease-fire by establishing an effective anti-smuggling regime to prevent Hamas from rearming, and facilitating in partnership with the Palestinian Authority a major reconstruction effort for Palestinians in Gaza."

Obama in the statement pledged that the United States, working with the international community, "would do its part to make these efforts successful."

He also communicated to the four leaders "his commitment to active engagement in pursuit of Arab-Israeli peace from the beginning of his term" and "his hope for their continued cooperation and leadership..."

[Link: jta.org...]

356 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:26:57am
357 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:27:02am

Just today... Judge bans Bible from school [i know... its wnd]

358 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:27:13am

re: #344 infidel4ever

Freedom of religion is fine. But Islam is more than just a believe system, it is a way of life that overrules all else. Besides, look at the freedom of religion in Islamic countries. Keep giving Islam the space to grow in the US and eventually you will end up like Saoudi-Arabia. Islam only. It is the nature of Islam.

That would first require the First Amendment to be repealed and that will never happen.

359 Gella  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:27:22am

re: #348 Kenneth

nooo, not the teddy bears, bastards

360 Charles Johnson  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:27:30am

re: #300 buzzsawmonkey

Supporting Wilders ensures, if anything can, that his more extreme ideas and more obnoxious associates will remain marginal. Supporting government suppression of Wilders ensures that free speech is a dead letter, and that only government-approved sentiments may be expressed.

The problem for Wilders (and it's a microcosm of the problem of "anti-jihadists" who invite fascists into their tent) is that by taking extremist positions and pushing the envelope so hard (for publicity?), he also ensures that when the government does bring the boot down on his neck, there are a lot fewer people who will speak out against it.

361 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:27:35am
362 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:27:35am

re: #348 Kenneth

So are Jews! Nice!

363 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:27:39am

Slightly off topic, but:

Did anyone catch the line in 44's press conference about being open, which included access to material from previous presidents?

I took that as an apparent shot at Bush, but more importantly, a veiled threat against Clinton.

364 2by2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:28:09am

re: #349 buzzsawmonkey

Thank you.

Where did you grow up, if I may ask?

You're welcome.
Germany, born in Essen and spent my last 10 years there in Cologne; happily naturalized in Dec 2000.

365 Ben Hur  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:28:09am

re: #356 Ben Hur


Whoops.

BNP link.

Sorry.

366 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:28:12am

re: #340 Guanxi88

I'd argue, and others have as well, that the 2nd is the guarantee clause of the other 8 as well.

That would not be an argument, just an expansion of the idea I was addressing in my comment.

367 Kenneth  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:28:28am

re: #362 WriterMom

On the other hand, why would you want to go there?

368 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:28:30am

re: #320 Kenneth

Recently I saw a book about book banning in America. There were some books that were outright banned, however, most of the books were not so much banned as dropped from high-school reading libraries or reading lists. That's not the same thing as banned.

You want to find out about banned books? Try bringing a Bible into Saudi Arabia.

Change you can believe in.
liberals=dropped
conservatives=banned

369 FightingBack  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:28:35am

re: #337 Silhouette

Wow. Thanks.

370 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:28:41am

re: #356 Ben Hur

So, what's your point.

HAHAHAHHAA just kidding. You mean-you want the laws applied to Muslims just like infidels? HAHAHAHHA good one.

371 Dustyvet  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:28:48am

re: #342 ploome hineni


my favorite commercial

And here's mine...:)

Youtube Video
372 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:29:08am

re: #332 Gella

you can probably bring Bible, but i am not sure about Torah

You CANNOT bring a Bible into the Kingdom. It will be confiscated and destroyed.

373 Truck Monkey  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:29:09am

re: #297 faraway

Distributing Bibles, along with other forms of proselytizing by non-Muslims, is also banned in Saudi Arabia

As is wearing a Star of David or Cross necklace, or otherwise identifying yourself as a religious person.... other that Islam. Tough place to visit if you stray from the "tourist" areas.

374 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:29:10am

re: #344 infidel4ever

Freedom of religion is fine. But Islam is more than just a believe system, it is a way of life that overrules all else. Besides, look at the freedom of religion in Islamic countries. Keep giving Islam the space to grow in the US and eventually you will end up like Saoudi-Arabia. Islam only. It is the nature of Islam.

Do you support the mission of Vlaams Belangs?

375 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:29:13am

re: #344 infidel4ever

Freedom of religion is fine.

"Fine"? It's guaranteed in the First Amendment. In fact, the first two clauses of the First Amendment guarantee it.

376 Silhouette  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:29:29am

re: #364 2by2

Welcome to the party, pal.

377 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:29:35am

re: #367 Kenneth

Why-to build the Third Temple and to have the first ever bagel brunch in the Magic Kingdom. DUH.

378 Born_to_lose  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:29:41am

re: #306 Walter L. Newton

Yes, and this is a classic case of NOT protecting the country AND the future of the constitution when we protect a religion that calls for the dismemberment of our exitence. Please, try and take a peek at reality from behind that veil of Political Correctness. There HAS GOT to be a point when we pull the reigns in a little bit. Hindus do not call for the killing, conquering, or subjugation of other faiths. Nor does Buddhism, Christinaity, Daoism, Paganism, etc. Islam is NOT just a socio-religious movement - it is also socio-political and now socio-economic. Yes, freedom of religion in the US, fine. BUT NOT freedom of ANY religion to infiltrate our governing system. When we can, or the Netherlands can, charge someone for HATE Speech in the wake of revealing HATE SPEECH from that which it is being accused, the source of the hate speech, or the Qur'an, has THEN just infiltrated the judiciary system in that country!

379 Guanxi88  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:30:37am

re: #366 FurryOldGuyJeans

That would not be an argument, just an expansion of the idea I was addressing in my comment.

I mean argue in the sense of present the suggestion, supported factually. The interlocking nature of the first 10 amendments is really something to behold. The first ensures dissemination of dissent, the second shields the people as individuals from direct violence or threat of violence, irrespective of source, etc., etc. Sharp guys, those Founders.

380 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:31:01am
381 jantjepietje  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:31:04am

re: #275 Charles

That's interesting. Didn't know that - I thought there were laws explicitly banning the book.


I was only partly right I see now there are some laws that prohibit it but they are not specific to mein kampf
from wikpedia

As per German copyright law the entire text is scheduled to enter the public domain on December 31, 2015, 70 years after the author's death. The government of Bavaria, in agreement with the federal government of Germany, refuses to allow any copying or printing of the book in Germany, and opposes it also in other countries but with less success. Owning and buying the book is legal. Trading in old copies is legal as well unless it is done in such a fashion as to "promote hatred or war," which is, under anti-revisionist laws, generally illegal

So trading it with the intent to promote hatred or war is illegal that is sort of hard to prove though

382 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:31:27am
383 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:31:34am

re: #363 jwb7605

Slightly off topic, but:

Did anyone catch the line in 44's press conference about being open, which included access to material from previous presidents?

I took that as an apparent shot at Bush, but more importantly, a veiled threat against Clinton.

Sandy Berger must be out buying more pairs of socks.

384 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:31:43am

buzzsaw- I don't think you and I disagree. In the matter of the law, as an American, I support free speech. It is my personal feelings concerning european fascism that make me hesitant to throw much enthusiasm behind that support.

385 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:31:51am

re: #327 Kenneth

Absolutely. More people should read the Koran. It's a real eye-opener!

Money should be raised to distribute FREE copies of the Koran throughout the world.

/of course with all the calls to violence throughout highlighted (in fluorescent yellow marker).

386 Dustyvet  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:31:53am

re: #382 ploome hineni

embedding disabled

heh?

387 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:32:00am
388 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:32:24am

re: #361 buzzsawmonkey

The Library of Banned Books--chock-full of first seditions!

LOL! Love the word play.

389 Guanxi88  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:32:39am

re: #380 Iron Fist

If a man thinks himself to be free, but lacks the arms and will to defend that freedom, he is not free. He is merely fortunate.

Natch, and a point worth reminding folk, from time to time.

A good maxim I've heard is that most men (and in using the term "men," I include of course the distaff side as well) do not want liberty so much as they want a benevolent master.

390 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:32:46am

re: #373 Truck Monkey

As is wearing a Star of David or Cross necklace, or otherwise identifying yourself as a religious person.... other that Islam. Tough place to visit if you stray from the "tourist" areas.

Don't speak English in Turkey either.

391 Ben Hur  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:33:16am

re: #365 Ben Hur

Whoops.

BNP link.

Sorry.

Thank you!

Did Google Image and didn't notice the link.

I'm on a role this month.

392 Born_to_lose  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:33:34am

re: #374 Walter L. Newton

Jesus! Typical LGF response to ANYTHING challening the seemingly newly adopted political correctness around here. Look, this is NOT about Race. Islam is NOT a race. It is an ideology that has spun, from it's inception, out of control, and spread like a cancer to consume all in it's path. It is a political, economic and social movement that threatens, or intrigues, it's adhearants using a very twisted "religious" doctrine.

393 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:33:44am

re: #378 Born_to_lose

Yes, and this is a classic case of NOT protecting the country AND the future of the constitution when we protect a religion that calls for the dismemberment of our exitence. Please, try and take a peek at reality from behind that veil of Political Correctness. There HAS GOT to be a point when we pull the reigns in a little bit. Hindus do not call for the killing, conquering, or subjugation of other faiths. Nor does Buddhism, Christinaity, Daoism, Paganism, etc. Islam is NOT just a socio-religious movement - it is also socio-political and now socio-economic. Yes, freedom of religion in the US, fine. BUT NOT freedom of ANY religion to infiltrate our governing system. When we can, or the Netherlands can, charge someone for HATE Speech in the wake of revealing HATE SPEECH from that which it is being accused, the source of the hate speech, or the Qur'an, has THEN just infiltrated the judiciary system in that country!

When we find them breaking our laws, then we prosecute and bring them to trial, as have been done here in the US. When we find them breaking our laws (such as Waco), we will fight them and bring them to justice.

But, we don't ban them.

394 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:33:44am

re: #372 NelsFree

You CANNOT bring a Bible into the Kingdom. It will be confiscated and destroyed.

In fact, you may be destroyed.

395 ThinkRight  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:33:45am

re: #139 Charles

I guess it's time to add that to the dictionary.


NNooooo !
If you do not add that name he is just a figment of my imagination
/

396 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:33:51am
397 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:33:58am

re: #385 unrealizedviewpoint

Money should be raised to distribute FREE copies of the Koran throughout the world.

/of course with all the calls to violence throughout highlighted (in fluorescent yellow marker).

Then, we could just refer to specific page numbers for reference.

398 opnion  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:34:02am

I don't believe in book baning, but to equate islam to violence & the Koran to Mein Kampf should be permitted as free expression(not to mention true)
To say that this guy is engaging in hate speech, but allow the Koran is hypicritical.
All should be permitted

399 2by2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:34:05am

re: #352 Arrr

You know what? As horrifying as this is, it's just another symptom of Europe being Europe. The whole history of Europe (with some exception) is basically illiberal bad guys vs illiberal bad guys - one group of people trying to trample on the rights of another. Scum who want to ban the hijab versus scum who want to force everyone to wear it on pain of death. Multicultural fascists vs Euro fascists vs Islamic fascists. Nazis vs Communists. Ethnicity against ethnicity. Tribe against tribe. The one thing that these idiots have in common is anti-semitism and contempt for individual rights. Eventually Europe will learn its lesson, but expect things to get much, much worse before they get better.

You're on to something, see my #273
I disagree that Europe will learn it's lesson; it can't. As soon as it started to see the mistakes and downfalls of the past it was challenged with the recurrence of yet another tribal issue: Islam.

400 Only The Lurker Knows  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:34:19am

re: #104 Walter L. Newton

FWIW

Lady Chatterley's Lover for one was temporarily banned in the United States for violating obscenity laws.

Tropic of Cancer By Henry Miller (Same Link)

Banned in the US in the 1930s until the early 1960s, seized by US customs for sexually explicit content and vulgarity. The rest of Miller's work was also banned by the United States

Could probably find more, but what's the point

401 Lincolntf  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:34:21am

I don't want to start a cascade of down-dings, but does anyone else notice the surface irony of people not being able to link to various sites during a discussion of free speech?
Disclaimer: I have no idea what they did to incur the wrath of LGF, and I know that LGF is not a Government that can actually mandate what people do, but it still tickled my irony bone.

402 FightingBack  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:34:29am

re: #385 unrealizedviewpoint

Money should be raised to distribute FREE copies of the Koran throughout the world.

/of course with all the calls to violence throughout highlighted (in fluorescent yellow marker).

Many could wind up in toilets, however. Plumbing problems are bad for civil equilibrium.

403 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:34:29am

re: #353 MandyManners

According to Black's Law Dictionary, sedition is an agreement, communication or other preliminary activity aimed at inciting treason or som lesser commotion against public authority.

I contend that the Ummah's actions in support of the institution of sharia in many countries is a direct result of the correct interpretation of the Qu'ran and therefore constitutes sedition. Therefore, the Qu'ran is a source of seditious material. Thank you, Mandy.

404 Outrider  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:34:36am

re: #332 Gella

you can probably bring Bible, but i am not sure about Torah

no, you cannot bring Bibles, Torahs, crucifixes and the like into SA. It will in all likelihood be confiscated.

405 Peter  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:34:52am
No, he actually wants the Koran to be banned.

Yes, true, I just read it here: [Link: www.radionetherlands.nl...]

What a coming out for a radical liberal thinker like him.

406 AuntAcid  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:34:56am

re: #348 Kenneth

What's the Saudi/ME position on tattoos?

407 Kenneth  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:35:09am

re: #380 Iron Fist

There was a Dutch politician who said something like, "We Dutch are very good at enjoying our freedoms, but not so good at defending them."

Does anybody know who said it and what the precise quotation was?

408 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:35:24am
409 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:35:44am

re: #379 Guanxi88

I mean argue in the sense of present the suggestion, supported factually. The interlocking nature of the first 10 amendments is really something to behold. The first ensures dissemination of dissent, the second shields the people as individuals from direct violence or threat of violence, irrespective of source, etc., etc. Sharp guys, those Founders.

If you go to that line of thinking the 2nd amendment is the guarantor of the ENTIRE Constitution

410 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:35:55am
411 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:36:19am

re: #403 NelsFree

I contend that the Ummah's actions in support of the institution of sharia in many countries is a direct result of the correct interpretation of the Qu'ran and therefore constitutes sedition. Therefore, the Qu'ran is a source of seditious material. Thank you, Mandy.

*sigh* Never mind.

412 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:36:25am

re: #401 Lincolntf

And even down dinged for pointing it out. haha

413 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:36:26am
414 albusteve  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:36:31am

re: #394 unrealizedviewpoint

In fact, you may be destroyed.

destroyed by the neck until dead!....

415 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:36:37am

re: #392 Born_to_lose

Jesus! Typical LGF response to ANYTHING challening the seemingly newly adopted political correctness around here. Look, this is NOT about Race. Islam is NOT a race. It is an ideology that has spun, from it's inception, out of control, and spread like a cancer to consume all in it's path. It is a political, economic and social movement that threatens, or intrigues, it's adhearants using a very twisted "religious" doctrine.

Sorry you don't like my question. It wasn't even addressed to you. Sorry that I see things a little more black and white than you do. Sorry that I respect the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Sorry that I will not damn a whole group of people just because of a radical subset of those people. Too bad I'm an American.

416 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:36:49am

re: #401 Lincolntf

What?

417 Anthony (Los Angeles)  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:37:07am
...but it’s difficult to cast Wilders as an icon of free speech when he explicitly advocates taking away the rights of others.

Not really. Wilders' mistaken belief in banning the Qur'an is separate from the issue of the Dutch government's persecution of him for fitna. I don't agree with his call to ban the Qur'an, either, but his right to free speech is absolute and should be vigorously defended as such.

418 Killian Bundy  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:37:10am

Obama Orders Halt to Prosecutions at Guantánamo

In the first hours of his presidency, President Barack Obama directed an immediate halt to the Bush administration’s military commissions system for prosecuting detainees at the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Notice of the decision came in a legal filing in Guantanamo by military prosecutors just before midnight Tuesday. The decision, which had been expected as part of Mr. Obama’s pledge to close the detention camp, was described as a pause in all war-crimes proceedings there so that the new administration can evaluate how to proceed with prosecutions.

Among other cases, the decision will temporarily stop the prosecution of five detainees charged as the coordinators of the Sept. 11 attacks, including the case against the self-described mastermind, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.

Because God forbid that any of these monsters should face punishment.

/mark my words, they'll transfer them to U.S. courts, change the prosecution legal paradigm and, not without cause, the LLL ACLU lawyers will start screaming double jeopardy

419 2by2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:37:33am

re: #376 Silhouette

Welcome to the party, pal.

thanks, enjoying every minute of it!

420 Silhouette  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:37:56am

re: #392 Born_to_lose

It is a political, economic and social movement that threatens, or intrigues, it's adhearants using a very twisted "religious" doctrine.

Like communism, nazism, and for the most part, the idelogy of the KKK. But all three of those are legal in the USA. And should be.

To be truly free, we have to allow others to be free to be hate-filled idiots.

421 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:38:50am

re: #401 Lincolntf

1) This is private property so free speech doesn't apply

2) No one is being charged with a criminal offense- it's just a deletion

3) Not allowing certain sites to be linked here in no way prevents anyone from looking up that site on their own if they so desire

422 Lee Coller  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:39:00am

re: #420 Silhouette

Like communism, nazism, and for the most part, the idelogy of the KKK. But all three of those are legal in the USA. And should be.

To be truly free, we have to allow others to be free to be hate-filled idiots.

Note that countries where such speech is banned seemed to have more trouble with these hate-filled idiots than we do here in the good ole USA.

423 Lincolntf  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:39:12am

re: #412 faraway

The irony piles on top of itself. It's priceless.

Totally O/T, the Feb. issue of Scientific American just showed up. The banner headline? How Eating Meat Contributes to Global Warming. Is there no escape from this madness?

424 Kenneth  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:39:22am

re: #418 Killian Bundy

Almost all the evidence is inadmissible, and most did not commit any crimes within the US. In the end Obama will simple create a new prison and ship them there. Nothing will be different except the name.

425 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:39:36am
426 2by2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:39:48am

re: #410 ploome hineni

what was the previous tribal issue?

Jews, Slavs, Gypsies, east vs west, north vs south, Germans vs French,
take your pick.

427 zombie  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:39:55am

Here's my take on it:

Wilders doesn't actually want to ban the Koran. He merely suggested that it be banned as a way to sully the book's reputation. In effect: The suggestion is the punishment.

This is similar to many leftists calling for the Bush administration to be put on trial for war crimes. Yes, some moonbats would actually go that far, but I suspect many make the suggestion simply as a way of damaging Bush's legacy -- the mere fact that he could be considered for war crimes prosecution is sufficient to make him seem like damaged goods. (They wouldn't want to actually prosecute him, lest they look like bullies.)

I think that what Wilders wanted to do was raise the notion in Dutch people's minds that the Koran is so noxious that it would even be considered a candidate for banning. And even though he knows it will never be banned, there are now a lot of people who have filed away in their brains the fact that the Koran must be so offensive in parts that it's on the "maybe list" for banning. And this subtle-yet-invisible change in people's attitude is what Wilders was seeking.

428 JHW  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:39:59am

re: #116 Dustyvet

Dusty, I found this on another site, I vaguely remember years ago reading that royalties were being paid on Mein Kampf . Apparently the German state of Bavaria still owns the copyright.
Mein Kampf and copyright.

Mein Kampf Royalties

Wiki also discusses this I think.

429 rawmuse  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:40:03am

re: #352 Arrr

You know what? As horrifying as this is, it's just another symptom of Europe being Europe. The whole history of Europe (with some exception) is basically illiberal bad guys vs illiberal bad guys - one group of people trying to trample on the rights of another... .

Interesting as I have been reading about one particular European personality who successfully repulsed the Islamic hordes (aka Ottoman Empire) during his lifetime. He was a Christian (supposedly).

His name was Vlad III the Impaler.

430 jantjepietje  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:40:45am

re: #283 FurryOldGuyJeans

re: #321 FurryOldGuyJeans

Yeah this is all speculation though. There are no specific laws against Mein Kampf or denying the holocaust or whatever only very general hatespeach laws leftwing groupsalways push for those hate speachs laws to apply to neo-nazi's etc but convintion really depends on the mood of the judge and the argument that any action was done in the ' public debate' basically automatically sets you free anyway

431 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:41:03am

re: #411 MandyManners

*sigh* Never mind.


Mandy, you are so CUTE when you sigh. May I get a picture for my collection of sighing ladies?

432 Lincolntf  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:41:04am

re: #421 Sharmuta

I never said it was the same as a book banning. Read my post, it was just an aside about a petty issue that I think was funny on it's face.
Sheesh, I've got to learn to be more delicate with some of you people.

433 David IV of Georgia  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:41:12am

re: 266 Charles

re: #213 faraway

The Bible is banned in schools.


That's not true.

There is no general ban against students having Bibles at school. Many schools have rules against distributing religious or political literature. Many school libraries do not have the Bible—some because they don't want it and some because they don't want to create problems.

If they have a Bible, then conceivably they could be asked and be expected to purchase books other faiths consider holy. If they buy a particular translation of the Bible, it is possible that that translation is not liked by someone who wants a different translation purchased.

434 Guanxi88  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:41:27am

re: #406 AuntAcid

What's the Saudi/ME position on tattoos?

Can't speak for Muslims, but Moses' kids don't think it's a great idea to mark yourself up so.

435 J.S.  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:41:36am

re: #324 WriterMom

thank you for that link! It's a real eye-opener...(might add that people could possibly make an argument about NOT publishing texts which violate the laws -- child pornography, obviously libelous texts, etc. -- but with Saudi princes suing historians, it's far more about Saudis wishing to silence political opinions, and is an obvious encroachment on a Free Press.) (oh, also happened to read about an Iraqi (iirc) millionaire who went around to UK libraries and removed pages from reknown, treasured, texts -- anything critical of Islam, etc. got ripped out -- he was sentenced to two years in prison...it reminds me of a certain cultural difference between Arabs and Juice -- one is forever attempting to disguise/hush up and/or cover up; the other reveals and exposes all flaws, etc....)

436 Kosh's Shadow  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:41:50am

re: #423 Lincolntf

The irony piles on top of itself. It's priceless.

Totally O/T, the Feb. issue of Scientific American just showed up. The banner headline? How Eating Meat Contributes to Global Warming. Is there no escape from this madness?

Great. Maybe I'll have to cancel Unscientific UnAmerican now. They've been getting way too political. Science News doesn't have the in-depth articles, and does interview moonbat global warming people, but is not as overtly political.

437 Texas Heathen  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:42:16am

re: #396 ploome hineni

defective link

They've got pills for that now

438 3 wood  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:42:16am

OT:

The market is up about 2.5% today. The Messiah is healing the markets with his wonderful presence.

/

439 ThinkRight  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:42:52am

O.T.
How are Kennedy and Byrd doing today ?
I have not heard

440 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:42:53am
441 Born_to_lose  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:43:00am

re: #415 Walter L. Newton

A radical Subset? This is why there will be more strife in this country. Islam has not been hijacked, as our former administration would want us to believe. The proof is in the pudding. The words are straight from the Qur'an. Those scriptures, mostly dealt in Muhammads later years in Medina, that advocate the violence and subjugation WILL NEVER BE reformed, or cast out of their text. Muslims consider this the Word of Allah, therefore, if these sentiments remain for public consumption, and it is the fastest growing religion, then, you put two and two together. I cannot make this any clearer. If there is no reformation, and there is a growing sense of hostility, and wanting to adhere strictly to the contents of the Qur'an, you tell ME what the next step and future of America looks like. If we all adhere to/maintain your current mindset, I would say pretty bleak at best...

442 Silhouette  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:43:06am

re: #438 3 wood

OT:

The market is up about 2.5% today. The Messiah is healing the markets with his wonderful presence.

/

It's that 150 million that he pumped into the economy yesterday.

;-)

443 Silhouette  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:43:18am

re: #439 ThinkRight

O.T.
How are Kennedy and Byrd doing today ?
I have not heard

Kennedy was released.

444 Charles Johnson  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:43:43am

re: #387 buzzsawmonkey

If you mean that in the near term people will keep quiet for fear that they will suffer the fate that Wilders (e.g.) brings upon himself with his grandstanding, you may well be right.

Not just that -- by taking extremist positions, he also loses the sympathy of moderate people who might otherwise be persuaded by his arguments. So when he gets in trouble for "hate speech," he has fewer people to stand up for him, not just out of fear, but because they don't agree with the extremist aspects.

445 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:44:10am

re: #429 rawmuse

Interesting as I have been reading about one particular European personality who successfully repulsed the Islamic hordes (aka Ottoman Empire) during his lifetime. He was a Christian (supposedly).

His name was Vlad III the Impaler.

Vlad copied the methods Muslims were using.

446 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:44:16am

re: #431 NelsFree

Mandy, you are so CUTE when you sigh. May I get a picture for my collection of sighing ladies?

If I weren't lazy right now I'd shake my clue-bat atcha'.

447 Kosh's Shadow  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:44:27am

re: #439 ThinkRight

O.T.
How are Kennedy and Byrd doing today ?
I have not heard

The Boston radio this morning said Kennedy's seizure was due to stress and he'd be out soon.

448 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:44:39am
449 Truck Monkey  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:44:44am

re: #390 faraway

Don't speak English in Turkey either.

Really? When I was there they loved talking to me in english..... especially when I was buying their Turkish trinkets to bring back home with me.

450 Offendi  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:44:44am

I love the Dutch people but overly liberal immigration and asylum policies have loaded their cities with many who don't believe in any assimilation into Dutch society or cultural, but do believe in massive welfare payments and healthy self-unemployment while having large families.

Wilders may be a deliberate provocateur but he has raised issues that need to be discussed, especially considering muslim demographics in Europe.The hadiths and suras do speak for themselves, and quite clearly
and you only need ask Christian Palestinians how hospitable it was to live with their muslim brethren after Arafat came back in 1993.

The sad thing about this of course is that the pro-Hamas demonstrators here in the USA who wanted Jews back in the ovens and made similar hate speech would never be charged there like Wilders was in Holland. You see Jews tend to be a civilized people and don't tend to riot at the drop of a hat. We will be increasingly become Fortress America over the next 30 years as Europe drifts away from western civilization. All the more reason for tougher immigration and asylum laws.

451 Ben Hur  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:44:50am

re: #401 Lincolntf

I don't want to start a cascade of down-dings, but does anyone else notice the surface irony of people not being able to link to various sites during a discussion of free speech?
Disclaimer: I have no idea what they did to incur the wrath of LGF, and I know that LGF is not a Government that can actually mandate what people do, but it still tickled my irony bone.

Interesting point, but as I see it, LGF is a private enterprise.

There is no freedom of speech.

452 infidel4ever  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:44:51am

re: #374 Walter L. Newton

Do you support the mission of Vlaams Belangs?

I am Dutch, not Belgian, so supporting or not supporting them is not an issue. And no, I am not a racist, or in favour of White Power or a white Europe or whatever. The last thing you need to judge a person on is the colour of his skin. Like MLK says: judge people on the content of their character. However, we now have millions of people in Europe who consider the "natives" second rate because we are not Muslims. Are we supposed to put up with that? What about the right to be judged by the content of our character?

453 Achilles Tang  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:45:12am

re: #77 buzzsawmonkey

Thanks.

All the more reason to suspect that Wilders' call to "ban the Koran" is intended as a means to awaken a supine citizenry to the danger within its midst, rather than a serious call for censorship.

If that were the case, perhaps he could simply have said "piss on the Koran", as a form of art.

Would that qualify for prosecution?

454 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:45:20am

I am not familiar with the context in which Wilders called for the Koran to be banned. Is he calling for this as a substantive position, or is he doing it a context of "if we have to have these ridiculous 'hate speech' laws, why aren't they being enforced in this case"?

455 FightingBack  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:45:24am

re: #447 Kosh's Shadow

His brain disease(s) had nothing to do with it.

456 ThinkRight  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:45:34am

re: #447 Kosh's Shadow
Thanks

457 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:45:49am

re: #446 MandyManners

If I weren't lazy right now I'd shake my clue-bat atcha'.


Okay, how about a picture of you waving the blue-cat, er, the clue-bat!

458 2by2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:45:51am

re: #425 buzzsawmonkey

A belated welcome, and my respect to those who, like yourself, appreciate the strengths of their adopted country.

Thanks, very much appreciated.
It pains me to see people, immigrants like me, who live here for decades and who still don't understand/appreciate the very foundations of this country.

459 Killian Bundy  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:45:53am

re: #424 Kenneth

Almost all the evidence is inadmissible, and most did not commit any crimes within the US. In the end Obama will simple create a new prison and ship them there. Nothing will be different except the name.

Once they're on U.S. soil proper, their lawyers will start working the Federal courts with renewed vigor.

/eventually, they'll all have to be either charged, deported, or released, they can't be held indefinitely without charges under U.S.law

460 rawmuse  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:45:57am

re: #445 NelsFree

Vlad copied the methods Muslims were using.

Now, now, let's not get in to a squabbling match about who impaled who first. ;)

461 Guanxi88  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:46:01am

re: #443 Silhouette

Kennedy was released.

Arraigned, bail, or what?

462 hellosnackbar  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:46:04am

re#360 Charles
I agree with you that Wilders'reputation took an almighty dive, when he appeared to ally himself, through common cause, with eurofacist scum.
But in my view his prosecution is great news.
He will almost certainly be exhonerated and thereby keep the problem of Islamonazis in the public eye.
BTW I read a definition of "jihad"on Melanie Phillips blog which states:
"Anything or anyone who resists Islamic dominance anywhere at any time;
must be eliminated."

463 Taqiyyotomist  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:46:26am

re: #150 Lizard by the Bay

In fact, the wider it is distributed, the better. Makes taqiyya much more difficult. I think a special annotated version should be published, so that people can be pointed right to the most bloodthirsty parts, read about abrogation, and come to truly understand what Islam is really about.

It would be pretty stupid to ban the one thing which proves the real purpose of Jihad and "being a good Muslim".

And that would be the one Koran to be banned, here, Europe, worldwide.
*spit*

464 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:46:28am

re: #441 Born_to_lose

A radical Subset? This is why there will be more strife in this country. Islam has not been hijacked, as our former administration would want us to believe. The proof is in the pudding. The words are straight from the Qur'an. Those scriptures, mostly dealt in Muhammads later years in Medina, that advocate the violence and subjugation WILL NEVER BE reformed, or cast out of their text. Muslims consider this the Word of Allah, therefore, if these sentiments remain for public consumption, and it is the fastest growing religion, then, you put two and two together. I cannot make this any clearer. If there is no reformation, and there is a growing sense of hostility, and wanting to adhere strictly to the contents of the Qur'an, you tell ME what the next step and future of America looks like. If we all adhere to/maintain your current mindset, I would say pretty bleak at best...

Then tell us, flat out, what is your solution?

465 Charles Johnson  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:46:29am

re: #401 Lincolntf

I don't want to start a cascade of down-dings, but does anyone else notice the surface irony of people not being able to link to various sites during a discussion of free speech?
Disclaimer: I have no idea what they did to incur the wrath of LGF, and I know that LGF is not a Government that can actually mandate what people do, but it still tickled my irony bone.

If you don't know what happened, or any of the details, why are you expressing an opinion?

466 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:46:30am

re: #438 3 wood

OT:

The market is up about 2.5% today. The Messiah is healing the markets with his wonderful presence.

/

We will remember this as the day when the yield curves ceased began to rise, and the planet began to heal...

467 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:46:31am
468 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:46:39am

re: #430 jantjepietje

Giving insight into current law is speculation to you.

O-K!

469 Nevergiveup  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:47:38am

Obama tells Mideast leaders he will work to consolidate Gaza ceasefire

[Link: www.ynetnews.com...]

Which cease fire? You mean the one that is already allowing the smuggling of weapons to continue? Thanks but No Thanks!

470 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:47:55am

re: #438 3 wood

OT:

The market is up about 2.5% today. The Messiah is healing the markets with his wonderful presence.

/

Take off the sarc tag and you just expressed seriously the FMSM meme.

471 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:48:26am

re: #460 rawmuse

Now, now, let's not get in to a squabbling match about who impaled who first. ;)

I doubt Vlad would have resorted to those methods if his lands were not being conquered by Islamic Armies. Therefore, ... pragmatism in action.

472 Dustyvet  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:48:46am

re: #418 Killian Bundy

Obama Orders Halt to Prosecutions at Guantánamo

Because God forbid that any of these monsters should face punishment.

/mark my words, they'll transfer them to U.S. courts, change the prosecution legal paradigm and, not without cause, the LLL ACLU lawyers will start screaming double jeopardy

And I suppose the moon bats will request they be let out on bail?

473 FightingBack  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:49:07am

re: #469 Nevergiveup

Would it be too much to ask for a POTUS to learn what a Hudna is?

474 3 wood  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:49:13am

re: #466 Occasional Reader

We will remember this as the day when the yield curves ceased began to rise, and the planet began to heal...

I still think the Dow will drop another 25%.

I guess I'm not giving "the One" the benefit of the doubt.

I'm hearing now that The Messiah may want to spend 2 trillion more on the banks

475 jcm  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:49:16am

re: #409 FurryOldGuyJeans

If you go to that line of thinking the 2nd amendment is the guarantor of the ENTIRE Constitution

Ultimately it is. The last measure to prevent tyranny.

476 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:49:18am

re: #387 buzzsawmonkey

If you mean that in the near term people will keep quiet for fear that they will suffer the fate that Wilders (e.g.) brings upon himself with his grandstanding, you may well be right.

I think the point is that Geert isn't really an advocate for freedom. His more extremist views about outlawing a religion will never gain popular support. Fewer people are likely to support him not out of fear but out of disgust for his ideas.

477 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:49:19am
478 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:49:37am

re: #452 infidel4ever

I am Dutch, not Belgian, so supporting or not supporting them is not an issue. And no, I am not a racist, or in favour of White Power or a white Europe or whatever. The last thing you need to judge a person on is the colour of his skin. Like MLK says: judge people on the content of their character. However, we now have millions of people in Europe who consider the "natives" second rate because we are not Muslims. Are we supposed to put up with that? What about the right to be judged by the content of our character?

Honest answer. The right to be judged by the content of your character is a process of your fellow citizens and your governments. Banning Islam, deporting Muslims or any other such schemes is not on the table, as far as I'm concerned.

Yes there is a problem, but it needs to be solved without stepping on the freedom of religion, at least that's my answer for the US.

479 albusteve  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:49:40am

re: #466 Occasional Reader

We will remember this as the day when the yield curves ceased began to rise, and the planet began to heal...

Redemption Day!....three day weekend dude!

480 Nevergiveup  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:49:41am

re: #473 FightingBack

Would it be too much to ask for a POTUS to learn what a Hudna is?

Like he and all the other liberal trash would care.

481 rawmuse  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:49:59am

re: #471 NelsFree

I doubt Vlad would have resorted to those methods if his lands were not being conquered by Islamic Armies. Therefore, ... pragmatism in action.

Vlad succeeded where others failed, this cannot be denied.

482 Kosh's Shadow  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:50:03am

re: #469 Nevergiveup

Obama tells Mideast leaders he will work to consolidate Gaza ceasefire

[Link: www.ynetnews.com...]

Which cease fire? You mean the one that is already allowing the smuggling of weapons to continue? Thanks but No Thanks!



He said Obama expressed "his commitment to active engagement in pursuit of Arab-Israeli peace from the beginning of his term."


He's going to throw Israel to the wolves.

483 AuntAcid  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:50:08am

re: #439 ThinkRight

O.T.
How are Kennedy and Byrd doing today ?
I have not heard

Conscious and arguing with themselves.

484 DistantThunder  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:50:09am

OT McCain is on the floor of the senate advocating for the Clinton confirmation. Rush pointed out the hypocrisy of a man who called for eliminating conflicts of interests and his support of a woman whose husband is in bed with 1/2 the governments in the world. At least 1/2 the governments.

485 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:50:18am

re: #447 Kosh's Shadow

The Boston radio this morning said Kennedy's seizure was due to stress and he'd be out soon.

From Congress and retired?

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE!

486 FightingBack  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:50:25am

re: #477 Iron Fist

This is LGF. Criticize away!

487 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:50:53am

re: #413 buzzsawmonkey

I think it is our mutual and deep love of the American rule of law which has us both on the side of Liberty more than on the side of the individual in question. It's a defense of principles. John Adams would be proud, perhaps.

488 Charles Johnson  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:50:56am

To make this clear, I'm not allowing links to sites that attack me personally (and the viciousness of those sites is almost beyond belief), or that are linked to fascist groups. If this policy makes you unhappy, I suggest you find somewhere else to post comments because this is not going to change.

489 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:50:57am

re: #477 Iron Fist

Obama'd probably give the motherfucker a medal if he thought he could get away with it. As is, I bet he winds up letting him go. Change you damn well better believe in. How much longer are we supposed to hold our peace before it is OK to criticise the One True God Obama?

You hold your tongue? HA!

490 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:51:01am

re: #407 Kenneth

There was a Dutch politician who said something like, "We Dutch are very good at enjoying our freedoms, but not so good at defending them."

Does anybody know who said it and what the precise quotation was?

I recognize the quote; I don't think it was a politician, though, rather a pundit. I know Mark Steyn quoted it in at least one piece - armed with that knowledge, you should have a relatively easy search with Your Favorite Search Engine.

491 Born_to_lose  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:51:02am

re: #460 rawmuse

Actually, a couple of years ago, I did som extensive study on Vlad. Seems he DID pick up the practice FROM the Ottomans, and then practiced it at the drop of a hat (truly a merciless individual. Being held prisoner by the Ottomans ef'd this dude up!)

492 livefreeor die  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:51:06am

OT-
Did Anklebitingpundits blog shut down? I haven't been able to access it for awhile and wondered if it's my computer or they closed up shop.

493 FightingBack  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:51:10am

re: #484 DistantThunder

And 1/2 their citizens.

494 Kosh's Shadow  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:51:21am

re: #477 Iron Fist

Obama'd probably give the motherfucker a medal if he thought he could get away with it. As is, I bet he winds up letting him go. Change you damn well better believe in. How much longer are we supposed to hold our peace before it is OK to criticise the One True God Obama?

It is already too late. Your community organizer has been notified. Expect a knock on your door in the middle of the night, Mr. Buttle.

495 Silhouette  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:51:22am

re: #479 albusteve

Redemption Day!....three day weekend dude!

The One gave me a four-day weekend. Snow day on inauguration day.

496 Dustyvet  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:51:31am

re: #428 JHW

Dusty, I found this on another site, I vaguely remember years ago reading that royalties were being paid on Mein Kampf . Apparently the German state of Bavaria still owns the copyright.
Mein Kampf and copyright.

Mein Kampf Royalties

Wiki also discusses this I think.

Okay thanks, I was just trying to figure that one out. After I found the web site that claimed it was public domain.

497 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:51:36am
498 Ben Hur  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:51:45am

Appropriate depiction, even if it was a "hoax."

Note the BBCs judgment of the meaning of the sculpture.

I would say it's more about the Netherlands being flooded with Muslim immigrants.

[Link: news.bbc.co.uk...]

499 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:52:03am

re: #463 Taqiyyotomist

And that would be the one Koran to be banned, here, Europe, worldwide.
*spit*

The Qu'ran that was authorized by Uthman (third Rightly Guided Caliph) is said to be "THE WORD OF Allah" and cannot be changed. Even translations are considered to be NOT the word of Allah. Suggesting any changes would most likely get you deadified real fast in any Muslim Country. Oh wait, we aren't a Muslim country!

500 ThinkRight  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:52:30am

re: #488 Charles

To make this clear, I'm not allowing links to sites that attack me personally (and the viciousness of those sites is almost beyond belief), or that are linked to fascist groups. If this policy makes you unhappy, I suggest you find somewhere else to post comments because this is not going to change.


atlas shrugged ?
/

501 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:52:37am

re: #477 Iron Fist

How much longer are we supposed to hold our peace before it is OK to criticise the One True God Obama?

Forever, DUH! ;)

502 notutopia  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:52:42am

re: #386 Dustyvet

heh?

Double click it. A new window will open it up.

503 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:52:43am
504 offendi  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:53:00am

At the end of the day nothing will happen to Wilders, except to get rich speaking fees and become a doyen of the anti-immigrant set in Europe.
The greater concern would be that this will have a chilling effect on Dutch political, cultural, and religious leaders standing up to preserve their national identity. This is the type of thing I worry about happening here in the USA.

505 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:53:21am

re: #427 zombie

Even if he is just trying to make point he's still going about it wrong. It would be like opposing the holocaust by advocating putting Germans in concentration camps. He's still advocating limiting the freedoms of others.

506 Gella  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:53:26am

re: #463 Taqiyyotomist

And that would be the one Koran to be banned, here, Europe, worldwide.
*spit*


ya no worries, they'll create a new Koran, Koran 2.0

507 Born_to_lose  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:53:35am

re: #464 Walter L. Newton

I can hear the collective gasp and grumble already, but, outlaw the practice and doctrine until it is reformed and no longer calls for the killing, conquering and subjugation of Non-believers of Allah/Islam.

508 rawmuse  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:53:59am

re: #491 Born_to_lose

The practice of impaling is still going on in Islam. There WAS a video of one on LiveLeak (I watched it once, and it was highly disturbing) it may still be there but I don't know. So I believe you.

509 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:54:05am
510 experiencedtraveller  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:54:31am

re: #438 3 wood

OT:

The market is up about 2.5% today. The Messiah is healing the markets with his wonderful presence.

/

Or it oversold its 8200 valuation...

511 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:54:47am

re: #474 3 wood

I still think the Dow will drop another 25%.

I guess I'm not giving "the One" the benefit of the doubt.

I'm hearing now that The Messiah may want to spend 2 trillion more on the banks

A trillion here, a trillion there, pretty soon, you're talking real money.


/an oldie but a goodie

512 Dustyvet  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:55:08am

re: #506 Gella

ya no worries, they'll create a new Koran, Koran 2.0

Vista Edition...

513 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:55:10am

re: #478 Walter L. Newton

Dear Walter,

You are right, we can't ban Islam. We can, however, prohibit acts which support the overthrow of our system of government. So, Islam advocates Sharia, which requires that Democracy be destroyed.
NOW WHAT DO WE DO?

514 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:55:10am
515 albusteve  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:55:17am

re: #507 Born_to_lose

I can hear the collective gasp and grumble already, but, outlaw the practice and doctrine until it is reformed and no longer calls for the killing, conquering and subjugation of Non-believers of Allah/Islam.

no....enforce the law

516 livefreeor die  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:55:42am

re: #509 Iron Fist

And I still haven't gotten my five million. I'm starting to be disappointed with the quality of service I'm getting from my very own store-bought Messiah. He needs to get with the program, and fork over the cash.

LOL! I'm wondering how many Obamites are experiencing post-inaugural lows now that the crowning is over and their lives have not changed.

517 AuntAcid  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:56:33am

re: #452 infidel4ever

You'll see the tipping point in your rear view mirror.
The question now is "what are you going do when they come for you?"

518 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:56:36am

I certainly don't support banning the Koran, but perhaps a warning label might be in order...

519 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:56:37am

re: #511 Occasional Reader

A trillion here, a trillion there, pretty soon, you're talking real money.

/an oldie but a goodie

A trillion here, and trillion there, you must be talking about government spending.

520 Dustyvet  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:56:39am

re: #509 Iron Fist

And I still haven't gotten my five million. I'm starting to be disappointed with the quality of service I'm getting from my very own store-bought Messiah. He needs to get with the program, and fork over the cash.

You think you got problems, my new Unicorn just went AWOL.

521 opnion  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:56:44am

re: #454 Occasional Reader

I am not familiar with the context in which Wilders called for the Koran to be banned. Is he calling for this as a substantive position, or is he doing it a context of "if we have to have these ridiculous 'hate speech' laws, why aren't they being enforced in this case"?

I get the feeling it's the latter. Would The government allow a White Power book advocating the liquidation of immigrants & minorities in general?
My guess is no. The Koran Is hateful & I think that he is just using a dramtic way of pointing it out

522 Nevergiveup  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:57:01am

Well at least Obama will get us back into the good graces of the UN:

UN Human Rights Bigwig Arrested On Kiddie Porn Charges

[Link: lawhawk.blogspot.com...]

I'm feeling better already. Aren't you?

523 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:57:13am

re: #507 Born_to_lose

That would violate the Constitution. Are you seriously arguing for banning a religion?

524 DeafDog  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:57:18am

re: #477 Iron Fist

Obama'd probably give the motherfucker a medal if he thought he could get away with it. As is, I bet he winds up letting him go. Change you damn well better believe in. How much longer are we supposed to hold our peace before it is OK to criticise the One True God Obama?

I unleash you.

Run like the wind and criticize all you want.

/Obama's always been fair game here.

525 David IV of Georgia  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:57:43am

re: #491 Born_to_lose

Actually, a couple of years ago, I did som extensive study on Vlad. Seems he DID pick up the practice FROM the Ottomans, and then practiced it at the drop of a hat (truly a merciless individual. Being held prisoner by the Ottomans ef'd this dude up!)

Why Vlad is famous is because he is the only "Christian" to fully use the torture methods of the Ottoman Turks. No one really cares that the Turks had been using such methods for centuries because it was widespread and common.

526 Charles Johnson  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:57:47am

re: #521 opnion

I get the feeling it's the latter. Would The government allow a White Power book advocating the liquidation of immigrants & minorities in general?
My guess is no. The Koran Is hateful & I think that he is just using a dramtic way of pointing it out

No -- I've been following his statements for years, and this is NOT just a dramatic overstatement. He is very serious about it.

527 OldLineTexan  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:57:56am

re: #443 Silhouette

Kennedy was released GITMO'D.

Just trying to get in the spirit of the new administration.

Sen. Kennedy, I hope you are able to rest up and strengthen yourself.

528 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:57:56am

re: #518 Occasional Reader

"warning this book may lead to spontaneous explosion."

529 debutaunt  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:58:03am

re: #50 Ay, Caramba

I will no longer buy Dutch Porn.

Hans Brinker does Dallas?

530 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:58:11am
531 DistantThunder  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:58:16am

re: #516 livefreeor die

LOL! I'm wondering how many Obamites are experiencing post-inaugural lows now that the crowning is over and their lives have not changed.

Hey where's my tax cut? When does that become a presidential priority. I never heard one word about it yesterday during the coronation.

532 descolada9  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:58:36am

Geert Wilders is wrong to call for the banning of the Koran and the Dutch court is wrong to call for his prosecution. Both actions put a chilling effect on free speech. I also fear that more and more our First Amendment rights will be chipped away here in the United States. We must remain ever vigilant to make sure that this doesn't happen.

533 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:58:50am

re: #507 Born_to_lose

I can hear the collective gasp and grumble already, but, outlaw the practice and doctrine until it is reformed and no longer calls for the killing, conquering and subjugation of Non-believers of Allah/Islam.

What don't you understand about the following?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

534 Gella  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:58:53am

re: #529 debutaunt

Hans Brinker does Dallas?


i heard Geerman is better then Dutch

535 DistantThunder  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:58:57am

re: #530 Iron Fist

McCain never fails to disappoint Republicans. He'll be a lot happier as Obama's bitch in the Senate than he would have been as President. I'm so glad it worked out for him.

The rest of us are pretty much fucked.

McCain = obama's poodle

536 J.S.  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:59:03am

re: #505 Killgore Trout

somewhat OT -- I suspect (would have to search for the link) that Wilders is absolutely serious about wanting to ban the Koran...(i don't think he's just saying this "for show"...I believe he's serious)...I vaguely recall a link here at lgf -- year or so ago? -- it was a radio interview with Wilders -- and the issue of banning the Koran came up -- and in this interview (iirc) Wilders re-asserted his belief that the Koran needed to be banned...(which is pretty jaw-dropping stuff and can hardly be thought of as a "winning propositition" in the Netherlands.)

537 infidel4ever  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:59:03am

re: #478 Walter L. Newton

Honest answer. The right to be judged by the content of your character is a process of your fellow citizens and your governments. Banning Islam, deporting Muslims or any other such schemes is not on the table, as far as I'm concerned.

Yes there is a problem, but it needs to be solved without stepping on the freedom of religion, at least that's my answer for the US.


Would you ban Islam if it did not have a religious component, if it was just a political movement with all the same fascist ideals it has now?

538 tfc3rid  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:59:37am

re: #484 DistantThunder

McCain is a waste at this point...

539 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:59:42am

It's especially hard for me to criticize Geert Wilders, because I loved him as Jim, "The Waco Kid" in Blazing Saddles.

540 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:59:49am

re: #523 Sharmuta

That would violate the Constitution. Are you seriously arguing for banning a religion?

IRT my earlier post, no, we can't ban a religion. We must ban any organization that calls for the overthrow of our government. Even if it is identified as a "religion". Wow.

So, Sharmuta, may I get a picture of you waving a clue-bat, too?

541 DeafDog  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:59:58am

re: #484 DistantThunder

OT McCain is on the floor of the senate advocating for the Clinton confirmation. Rush pointed out the hypocrisy of a man who called for eliminating conflicts of interests and his support of a woman whose husband is in bed with 1/2 the governments in the world. At least 1/2 the governments.

Of all the cabite picks, Clinton at SecState is the one that really stinks. Not only has she never been a diplomat or shown any great ability or knowledge in that regard, but having someone with a trust already set up to take foreign contributions be SecState is dumbest.

542 OldLineTexan  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 11:59:58am

re: #461 Guanxi88

Mean, but funny. But mean.

/

543 albusteve  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:00:00pm

re: #530 Iron Fist

McCain never fails to disappoint Republicans. He'll be a lot happier as Obama's bitch in the Senate than he would have been as President. I'm so glad it worked out for him.

The rest of us are pretty much fucked.

this is exactly why I think he tossed the election....he's still on easy street and his value went up as well....imo

544 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:00:09pm

re: #537 infidel4ever

Would you ban Islam if it did not have a religious component, if it was just a political movement with all the same fascist ideals it has now?

I wouldn't. We don't ban noxious political parties in America, we shun them.

545 livefreeor die  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:00:10pm

re: #531 DistantThunder

Hey where's my tax cut? When does that become a presidential priority. I never heard one word about it yesterday during the coronation.

Um, well, um, we're evaluating, um how to best,um, enact those, um with,um, the economic, um, situation.

546 Kenneth  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:00:16pm

re: #459 Killian Bundy

...eventually, they'll all have to be either charged, deported, or released, they can't be held indefinitely without charges under U.S.law

But the US cannot deport them to Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria, Algeria etc where the local authorities will torture them. So the US courts will be forced to release them in the US. Swell, heh?

547 Born_to_lose  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:00:46pm

re: #523 Sharmuta

No, I am in favor of a requirement that a socio-political, socio-economic, anti-democratic movement that calls itself a religion reform itself, or cease to be practiced in the US.

548 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:00:56pm

re: #529 debutaunt

Hans Brinker does Dallas?

Hans Brinker does Rotterdam

549 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:01:11pm

re: #509 Iron Fist

And I still haven't gotten my five million.

That's because we know what you'll spend it on. (Hint: itterbay ingclay)

550 yma o hyd  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:01:11pm

re: #488 Charles

Thank you, Charles - and may I add that, on top of this (as if that weren't enough already) these sites pave the way to antisemitism - the results of which we've seen in the last few weeks in the demonstrations across the Western countries.
Zomblog has some pictures, in case someone needs convincing.

551 Charles Johnson  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:01:16pm

re: #537 infidel4ever

Would you ban Islam if it did not have a religious component, if it was just a political movement with all the same fascist ideals it has now?

Here's a clue: do we ban the American Nazi Party?

552 notutopia  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:01:30pm

re: #427 zombie

Here's my take on it:

Wilders doesn't actually want to ban the Koran. He merely suggested that it be banned as a way to sully the book's reputation. In effect: The suggestion is the punishment.

This is similar to many leftists calling for the Bush administration to be put on trial for war crimes. Yes, some moonbats would actually go that far, but I suspect many make the suggestion simply as a way of damaging Bush's legacy -- the mere fact that he could be considered for war crimes prosecution is sufficient to make him seem like damaged goods. (They wouldn't want to actually prosecute him, lest they look like bullies.)

I think that what Wilders wanted to do was raise the notion in Dutch people's minds that the Koran is so noxious that it would even be considered a candidate for banning. And even though he knows it will never be banned, there are now a lot of people who have filed away in their brains the fact that the Koran must be so offensive in parts that it's on the "maybe list" for banning. And this subtle-yet-invisible change in people's attitude is what Wilders was seeking.

And what good will that theory's end be if he is found guilty in the legal system? The Islamics will then have a legal toehold and a "test" case won. Rethink this please.

553 Nevergiveup  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:01:31pm

re: #538 tfc3rid

McCain is a waste at this point...

No he is causing harm. That is worse.

554 Spenser (with an S)  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:01:31pm

Sorry, but most everyone has left the last thread. Were there any detainees at Gitmo who were not plucked off a battlefield? Any there you couldn't call a POW but rather a result of the POW's questioning or something? Just curious how strongly I can make that claim.

555 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:02:01pm

re: #529 debutaunt

Hans Brinker does Dallas?

Or Hans Brinker and the Silver Skanks

556 albusteve  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:02:15pm

re: #544 Sharmuta

I wouldn't. We don't ban noxious political parties in America, we shun them.

to bad the MSM doesnt and in fact embraces disfunctional assholes for juicy news entertainment

557 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:02:19pm

re: #536 J.S.

See my link at #114. He seems serious about it although he's realistic in acknowledging that it will never pass.

558 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:02:22pm

re: #547 Born_to_lose

No, I am in favor of a requirement that a socio-political, socio-economic, anti-democratic movement that calls itself a religion reform itself, or cease to be practiced in the US.

So in other words, yes. You are calling for it to be banned.

559 Dustyvet  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:02:23pm

re: #539 Occasional Reader

It's especially hard for me to criticize Geert Wilders, because I loved him as Jim, "The Waco Kid" in Blazing Saddles.

well there went key board 25...

560 David IV of Georgia  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:02:32pm

re: #508 rawmuse

The practice of impaling is still going on in Islam. There WAS a video of one on LiveLeak (I watched it once, and it was highly disturbing) it may still be there but I don't know. So I believe you.

I didn't know it was still practiced. It is about the only way to die worse than crucifixion. A proper executioner with a doctor's assistance can impale a person so that it takes them about a week to die.

561 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:02:33pm

re: #544 Sharmuta

I wouldn't. We don't ban noxious political parties in America, we shun them.

And, we mock them!

562 tfc3rid  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:02:41pm

re: #553 Nevergiveup

No he is causing harm. That is worse.

The Dems never needed 60 of their own in the Senate. They basically have 62 (McC, Snowe, Collins)

563 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:02:48pm

re: #530 Iron Fist

McCain never fails to disappoint Republicans. He'll be a lot happier as Obama's bitch in the Senate than he would have been as President. I'm so glad it worked out for him.

The rest of us are pretty much fucked.

Time for people to start mailing him Ds to go along with his new status.

564 Nevergiveup  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:02:54pm

re: #554 Spenser (with an S)

Sorry, but most everyone has left the last thread. Were there any detainees at Gitmo who were not plucked off a battlefield? Any there you couldn't call a POW but rather a result of the POW's questioning or something? Just curious how strongly I can make that claim.

They are all choir boys. Didn't you get the memo this morning from the White House?

565 DistantThunder  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:02:55pm

re: #541 DeafDog

Of all the cabite picks, Clinton at SecState is the one that really stinks. Not only has she never been a diplomat or shown any great ability or knowledge in that regard, but having someone with a trust already set up to take foreign contributions be SecState is dumbest.

A tax cheat as secretary at treasury is fairly stinky.

A commerce choice up to his eyeballs in pay to play stunk - BIG TIME

Then we have an intelligence head with no intelligence experience

A transportation choice who is in the TOP 10 "bridge to nowhere" pork spenders

566 rawmuse  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:03:05pm

re: #554 Spenser (with an S)

Yes, KSM was picked up out of his bed in Pakistan, for instance.

567 yma o hyd  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:03:14pm

re: #503 buzzsawmonkey

Yep.
Agree - and nobody said that freedom equals cosiness ...

568 opnion  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:03:16pm

re: #526 Charles

No -- I've been following his statements for years, and this is NOT just a dramatic overstatement. He is very serious about it.

In that case he has overplayed his hand. prosecuting him for his silly position looks silly as well though.

569 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:03:37pm

re: #561 MandyManners

And, we mock them!

Youtube Video
570 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:03:40pm

re: #551 Charles

Here's a clue: do we ban the American Nazi Party?

Do we ban the Communist Party of America?

571 maddogg  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:03:40pm

re: #481 rawmuse

Vlad succeeded where others failed, this cannot be denied.

If I recall correctly, Vlad used impalement to rid himself of his domestic enemies and rivals and to revenge his murdered father and consolidate his power long before he used it against the Ottomans.

572 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:03:42pm

re: #547 Born_to_lose

No, I am in favor of a requirement that a socio-political, socio-economic, anti-democratic movement that calls itself a religion reform itself, or cease to be practiced in the US.

Freedom for me but none for thee?

573 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:04:00pm

re: #533 MandyManners

What don't you understand about the following?

or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, ;and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

It does NOT say "the right of the people peaceably to assemble BOMBS". If Muslims engage in violent acts because the Qu'ran said they should do it, what then!?

574 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:04:11pm

re: #507 Born_to_lose

I can hear the collective gasp and grumble already, but, outlaw the practice and doctrine until it is reformed and no longer calls for the killing, conquering and subjugation of Non-believers of Allah/Islam.

I feel sorry for you. That's all I can say. And I hope you are never sitting on a jury judging me for anything.

575 Pyrocles  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:04:18pm

Poor Vlad... His brother, Radu, willingly converted to Islam. :(

re: #429 rawmuse

Interesting as I have been reading about one particular European personality who successfully repulsed the Islamic hordes (aka Ottoman Empire) during his lifetime. He was a Christian (supposedly).

His name was Vlad III the Impaler.

576 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:04:20pm

re: #529 debutaunt

re: #50 Ay, Caramba

I will no longer buy Dutch Porn.

Hans Brinker does Dallas?

One of us has to go the "... Finger in Dike" route. After you, Alphonse.

577 rawmuse  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:04:26pm

re: #571 maddogg

If I recall correctly, Vlad used impalement to rid himself of his domestic enemies and rivals and to revenge his murdered father and consolidate his power long before he used it against the Ottomans.

You are correct.

578 J.S.  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:04:28pm

re: #546 Kenneth

or, hey, here's a thought -- how about swallowing the bitter swill...

(I suspect Canaduh will also be getting Omar Khadr back real soon -- did you hear Ignatieff? -- arghh -- what a disgusting jerk Ignatieff is -- he wants little ol' Khadr "back home"...then hastily adds that he's not "anti-American" -- as if that's what's at issue. I just hope Canadians are intelligent enough not to make Khadr Canada's next multi-millionaire.)

579 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:04:30pm

re: #569 Sharmuta

Sorry- let me try that in English!

Youtube Video
580 albusteve  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:04:35pm

re: #561 MandyManners

And, we mock them!

cease your practice or I shall smite you with my rightous wind!

581 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:04:42pm

re: #569 Sharmuta



I hate Illinois Nazis.

(BTW, embedding denied.)

582 DeafDog  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:04:50pm

re: #518 Occasional Reader

I certainly don't support banning the Koran, but perhaps a warning label might be in order...


Said warning should be written by General Petreus, not the Surgeon General

583 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:05:02pm

re: #568 opnion

prosecuting him for his silly position looks silly as well though.


He's being prosecuted for the film Fitna. Our debate here about the Quran ban is a side issue about Geert's character.

584 Born_to_lose  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:05:11pm

re: #533 MandyManners

...um, because as I have said before, and it is unfortunate that the general consensus has not gotten with the program on this, is that it's much MORE a threat to democracy than it is a religion. It is a political and economic ideological movement hell bent on destroying the West, thanks to it's forefather and founder, Muhammad. Also, as I have said above, freedom of religion is fine. Freedom of any religion to infiltrate our judiciary or governing system is NOT and should be pushed back against. Sorry that you do not put value on the responsibility that we as Americans hold in terms of protecting our constitution and land...

585 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:05:12pm

re: #554 Spenser (with an S)

Sorry, but most everyone has left the last thread. Were there any detainees at Gitmo who were not plucked off a battlefield? Any there you couldn't call a POW but rather a result of the POW's questioning or something? Just curious how strongly I can make that claim.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed

586 Spenser (with an S)  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:05:19pm

re: #564 Nevergiveup

They are all choir boys

I wish they all sounded like Vienna choir boys courtesy of a rusty farm implement.

587 ThinkRight  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:05:27pm

re: #561 MandyManners

And, we mock them!


Then they are elected POTUS

588 Born_to_lose  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:05:31pm

re: #551 Charles

No, but we probably should!

589 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:05:32pm

re: #573 NelsFree

It does NOT say "the right of the people peaceably to assemble BOMBS". If Muslims engage in violent acts because the Qu'ran said they should do it, what then!?

You punish the behavior.

590 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:05:32pm
591 2by2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:05:35pm

re: #476 Killgore Trout

I think the point is that Geert isn't really an advocate for freedom. His more extremist views about outlawing a religion will never gain popular support. Fewer people are likely to support him not out of fear but out of disgust for his ideas.

You're thinking American and American values.
Europe doesn't have that type of ingrained values. You will be amazed how many people will jump on this and support Wilders for the wrong reasons.
Wilders doesn't want his country to be dominated by Islam and it's rules. I believe he has a point in this. This is not just about freedom, it is about European history and Islam's attempt to overrun Europe twice in the past.
There will be a resurgence of extreme right wing aka fascist ideology over the next decade in Europe and I believe that it will end up in a violent struggle with Islam.
Europe needs help and guidance from America, but you can't apply American values mechanically to European politics.
Unfortunately no one will listen and Europe's off to another slaughter.

592 bloodnok  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:05:57pm

re: #561 MandyManners

And, we mock them!


Can I lampoon them?

593 nikis-knight  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:06:00pm

By all means we should not ban the Koran among peaceful Muslims in Western nations, but we have got to be daft to provide the bloody things in prisons to the violent ones.

594 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:06:00pm

re: #573 NelsFree

It does NOT say "the right of the people peaceably to assemble BOMBS". If Muslims engage in violent acts because the Qu'ran said they should do it, what then!?

We punish polygamy by Mormons.

595 Charles Johnson  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:06:13pm

re: #588 Born_to_lose

No, but we probably should!

No, we shouldn't.

596 Spare O'Lake  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:06:15pm
Wilders, however, has called for the Koran to be outlawed. In other words, Wilders wants to ban books with which he doesn’t agree. If there’s one thing we should have learned from history, it’s that book-banning never turns out well—and it’s anathema to the American ideals of free speech and free choice of religion.

Since the Koran incites Muslims to kill Jews, then the issue is not simply one of banning books with which one does not agree.
In this limited respect, I respectfully disagree with the lead characterization of the issue.

If a non-religious book can properly be banned because it brazenly and openly incites murderous genocide against identifiable minorities, then the issue is whether a religious book can do the same thing with impunity merely because it is a "religious" book.
In other words, can a genocidal wolf successfully avoid the shepherd's staff by wrapping himself in a religious sheeps' clothing?
That is the real issue, as I see it.

597 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:06:18pm

re: #559 Dustyvet

well there went key board 25...

Sheriff Bart: So, what do you like to do?

Geert Wilders: Oh, I dunno. Ban Korans... screw...

Sheriff Bart: Let's ban Korans!

598 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:06:19pm
599 Kosh's Shadow  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:06:31pm

re: #535 DistantThunder

McCain = obama's poodle

My wimpiest poodle has more fight in him than McCain showed during the campaign.

600 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:06:34pm

re: #580 albusteve

cease your practice or I shall smite you with my rightous wind!

I fart in your general direction.

601 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:06:43pm

re: #588 Born_to_lose

I'm not interested in trying the failed notions of the europeans.

602 albusteve  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:07:02pm

re: #584 Born_to_lose

...um, because as I have said before, and it is unfortunate that the general consensus has not gotten with the program on this, is that it's much MORE a threat to democracy than it is a religion. It is a political and economic ideological movement hell bent on destroying the West, thanks to it's forefather and founder, Muhammad. Also, as I have said above, freedom of religion is fine. Freedom of any religion to infiltrate our judiciary or governing system is NOT and should be pushed back against. Sorry that you do not put value on the responsibility that we as Americans hold in terms of protecting our constitution and land...

sounds to me like you have it exactly backwards....so I do not value American law and custom?....should I be insulted?

603 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:07:09pm

re: #584 Born_to_lose

...um, because as I have said before, and it is unfortunate that the general consensus has not gotten with the program on this, is that it's much MORE a threat to democracy than it is a religion. It is a political and economic ideological movement hell bent on destroying the West, thanks to it's forefather and founder, Muhammad. Also, as I have said above, freedom of religion is fine. Freedom of any religion to infiltrate our judiciary or governing system is NOT and should be pushed back against. Sorry that you do not put value on the responsibility that we as Americans hold in terms of protecting our constitution and land...

Oh, piss off.

604 Dustyvet  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:07:12pm

re: #581 MandyManners

I hate Illinois Nazis.

(BTW, embedding denied.)

Lake County Illinois is full of em...

605 offendi  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:07:13pm

I am wondering if at the first Obama press conference they will give a guy from Al-Jazeera Helen Thomas' seat, and move her to the back of the room? I can hear Obama now, " Ah, yes, let me see, Mahmoud...what is question, for the oppressed arab masses? "

As for McCain, he wants his place in history, but life is funny. 100 years from now it may all be about his botched campaign, not him being Obama's "maverick".

Say, has Obama caught Bin Laden yet? I mean, it has been 24 hours or so !

606 Lee Coller  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:07:19pm

re: #584 Born_to_lose

Bunching all Muslims into the same group with the radicals is a mistake and simply not true. I have plenty of Muslim colleagues who want nothing to do with the radicals and love this country as much as I do.

607 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:07:22pm

re: #570 FurryOldGuyJeans

re: #551 Charles

Here's a clue: do we ban the American Nazi Party?

Do we ban the Communist Party of America?

Was it "over" when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

608 maddogg  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:07:32pm

re: #590 buzzsawmonkey

Giving them the stick, with a vengeance. But they certainly got the point.

In the end, the Ottomans conquered all of Vlad's lands.

609 jcm  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:07:33pm

re: #507 Born_to_lose

I can hear the collective gasp and grumble already, but, outlaw the practice and doctrine until it is reformed and no longer calls for the killing, conquering and subjugation of Non-believers of Allah/Islam.

That drives it underground and radicalizes it.

Allow it it be free and open, to speak, debate, and practice as they see fit.

Within our laws. When they violate a law, prosecute that crime.

We have a Constitutional right to practice religion. All religions, not just those that we like or are comfortable with. Violate that right for one group is the wrong thing to do. Once we justify it for one, the next one is easier to justify.

We welcome all, and their religion. We ask only one thing of them, that they do the same. We a person or group takes action to deny that right to another group then we have an actionable crime, not before.

If you think that's PC, you don't understand the concepts laid out in the Founding documents.

And yes I understand Islam, and the plans the radicals have as best described in Qtub's Milestones.

610 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:07:43pm
611 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:07:51pm

re: #587 ThinkRight

Then they are elected POTUS

He's a Democrat.

612 Pastorius  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:07:58pm

I agree with Charles that Wilders is not an icon of free specch by American standards.

However, think about this. A few years back, and politican in the Netherlands was asked about whether Sharia law could become part of the Dutch legal system.

His answer was that once Muslims became a majority, they could vote Sharia in as the law, because "that's Democracy."

That was really his answer.

But, that is not Democracy as we define Democracy in Western Civilization. Instead that is mob rule.

Democracy is a Republic (protected by a Constitution which in turn protects human rights) under which the people vote for laws and representatives.

The people do not rule over the Constitution, other than in the sense that we can amend it.

No one rules over the Constitution.

Sharia is anathema to Western Civilization.

As such, we can never allow any Islamist political party to gain any legitimate political power in any part of the Western world.

613 Lincolntf  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:07:59pm

re: #465 Charles

Because it caught my eye and I supposed that others also noticed it. Rest assured that if I really thought that LGF was a message pushing, speech-banning enterprise like so many other blogs/boards I wouldn't bother coming here.
But I'm glad you asked. There is a certain defensiveness and persecution complex among the regulars that comes through to those of us that are relatively new. I never really understood what seemed to be over-reactions until posters sent me to VB sites and the whole Atlas Shrugs thing. My goal is not to annoy people or bring up tangential links to things that might then be used to make you, personally, or the board, collectively, look bad on some of the other sites I've been sent to. Just making conversation.

614 Killian Bundy  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:08:20pm

re: #554 Spenser (with an S)

Any there you couldn't call a POW but rather a result of the POW's questioning or something? Just curious how strongly I can make that claim.

None of them should have been afforded POW status.

/the Law of Land warfare is very clear on the subject, they're unlawful comatants

615 Born_to_lose  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:08:25pm

re: #574 Walter L. Newton

You feel sorry for me because I have an opinion, and am expressing it thusly? Did I say that violence should be brought upon these people? No, I call for a diplomatic discussion on reformation of the violence that IS actually advocated in the Islamic texts... I feel sorry for YOU that you continue to exist behind the veil of denial that is PC'ness....

616 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:08:39pm

re: #588 Born_to_lose

No, but we probably should!

You really need to remember the /sarc tag when you start blathering about such idiocies. Otherwise people will take you seriously and see you as a sockpuppet or troll.

617 Spenser (with an S)  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:08:40pm

re: #594 MandyManners

re: #573 NelsFree

It does NOT say "the right of the people peaceably to assemble BOMBS". If Muslims engage in violent acts because the Qu'ran said they should do it, what then!?

We punish polygamy by Mormons.

We sent federal troops after them until they changed their minds on that bit of doctrine.

618 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:08:45pm

re: #588 Born_to_lose

No, but we probably should!

There's a nation for people who want to ban religion and political parties. It's called Saudi Arabia.

619 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:08:52pm

re: #571 maddogg

If I recall correctly, Vlad used impalement to rid himself of his domestic enemies and rivals and to revenge his murdered father and consolidate his power long before he used it against the Ottomans.

Source? Please?

620 infidel4ever  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:09:11pm

re: #551 Charles

Here's a clue: do we ban the American Nazi Party?

Was it banned during WWII? Or did you then subsidise the advance of nazism in the US as our governments are subsidizing and promoting "Islamic culture" here?

621 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:09:18pm

re: #592 bloodnok

Can I lampoon them?

Have at it.

622 Pastorius  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:09:31pm

Anyway, the question at hand here at this point in the thread is,

should we ban the Nazi political party.

No, but we should never allow them to have any legitimate political power, becase their principles are opposite of Western Civ.

Likewise with Islam.

623 Truck Monkey  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:09:56pm

re: #562 tfc3rid

The Dems never needed 60 of their own in the Senate. They basically have 62 (McC, Snowe, Collins)

63 - Senator Hagel
64 - Senator Lindsay Graham
65 - Senator Arlen Spector
66 - Senator Mel Martinez

Any more?

624 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:10:07pm

re: #537 infidel4ever

Would you ban Islam if it did not have a religious component, if it was just a political movement with all the same fascist ideals it has now?

We have fascist and neo-nazi political groups right now in the United States. They are not banned. If they break the law, the government will go after them. They may get more attention from the government, but no, they are not banned and no, I would not ban them.

And, a big difference, there are many Muslims that don't care a twit about taking over the world for Islam violently. I know them, I spoken to them, they are as bother as you are about the direction some Islamist have taken.

They ignore the places in the Koran that speaks of Jihad.

625 Nevergiveup  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:10:08pm

How do you fuck up a game after the whistle blows and you already won?

"Iraq is willing to have the U.S. withdraw all its troops and assume security for the country before the end of 2011, the departure date agreed to by former President George W. Bush, the spokesman of the Iraqi prime minister said."

[Link: apnews.myway.com...]

Let the good times roll!

626 Born_to_lose  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:10:09pm

re: #572 MandyManners

So, in mocking me, and not providing anything intellectual to counter my argument, you are basically saying that I am wrong for saying that an ideology that threatens that which upholds the constitution/democracy makes me a freedom hater? Ummm, kay....

627 Kosh's Shadow  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:10:10pm

re: #605 offendi


Say, has Obama caught Bin Laden yet? I mean, it has been 24 hours or so !

I hear yes, and, in the spirit of his other nominees, will be offering Osama the position of Director of Homeland Security.

628 Charles Johnson  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:10:16pm

re: #507 Born_to_lose

I can hear the collective gasp and grumble already, but, outlaw the practice and doctrine until it is reformed and no longer calls for the killing, conquering and subjugation of Non-believers of Allah/Islam.

Oh, for Pete's sake. Not this crap again.

And what exactly do you plan to do with the millions of people who practice Islam currently? Round 'em up? Put 'em in camps? Expel 'em? A mass grave somewhere?

I suggest you think about what you're advocating here, because if you continue you're not going to have a very long stay at LGF.

629 DeafDog  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:10:38pm

re: #565 DistantThunder

A tax cheat as secretary at treasury is fairly stinky.

A commerce choice up to his eyeballs in pay to play stunk - BIG TIME

Then we have an intelligence head with no intelligence experience

A transportation choice who is in the TOP 10 "bridge to nowhere" pork spenders


You could also mention the Attorney General who advocated for the marc Rich pardon and the Elian Gonzalez kidnapping in his last stint in government to the stinky ones.

It's quite a litany of bad choices......and he's only been in office one day.

Which is why it's such an honor for Hillary to be the worst one.

630 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:10:39pm

re: #615 Born_to_lose

You are naive if you think we can either force a religion to reform or no violence will occur if we outright ban it.

631 LGoPs  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:10:52pm

re: #598 Iron Fist

I don't know that he tossed the election, but at the same time it sure didn't look like he tried very hard to win. He was certainly not going to say anything that would burn bridges between himself and Obama (let alone the rest of the Democrats), even though it meant letting Obama get away with saying many things that were simply untrue.

He let Obama determine the boundries of the race, and made sure he didn't step on his toes. Like it was a fucking cotillion or something.

We need someone like Harvey "There ain't no rules in a knifefight" Logan to develop strategy for the Republicans........

632 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:11:02pm

re: #598 Iron Fist

He let Obama determine the boundries of the race, and made sure he didn't step on his toes. Like it was a fucking cotillion or something.

As an aside; this is one of the great remaining divides between North and South, Johnny Reb. I remember as a kid that my cousins from Florida would sometimes mention "cotillion". I had no frickking idea what they were talking about.

633 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:11:05pm

re: #615 Born_to_lose

Why you smarmy ashole!

634 unreconstructed rebel  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:11:26pm

re: #568 opnion

In that case he has overplayed his hand. prosecuting him for his silly position looks silly as well though.

Right. It seems to me the best way to deal with a kook is to ignore him. My obseravation is that the politcal lunatics eventually leave the field because no one will pay attention. Of course, some take longer than others, but sooner or later they go away.

635 albusteve  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:11:29pm

re: #598 Iron Fist

I don't know that he tossed the election, but at the same time it sure didn't look like he tried very hard to win. He was certainly not going to say anything that would burn bridges between himself and Obama (let alone the rest of the Democrats), even though it meant letting Obama get away with saying many things that were simply untrue.

He let Obama determine the boundries of the race, and made sure he didn't step on his toes. Like it was a fucking cotillion or something.

okay Mr. Nice Guy :)
I learned to really not like that man in the last year and it would not surprise me in the least if he had neferious designs all along with the election...and now it's obvious he's in BOs pocket....but he probably didnt toss it as you say..I'm just hayseed blunt about it

636 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:11:41pm

I'm gonna' take a break before I rip a new one. bbiaw

637 formercorpsman  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:11:54pm

re: #509 Iron Fist

I don't care if it rains or freezes, ...

638 Guanxi88  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:12:07pm

re: #633 MandyManners

Why you smarmy ashole!

Bravo, Mandy! Smarmy is good epithet, as is asshole, and both fit the case.

639 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:12:13pm

re: #584 Born_to_lose

...um, because as I have said before, and it is unfortunate that the general consensus has not gotten with the program on this, is that it's much MORE a threat to democracy than it is a religion. It is a political and economic ideological movement hell bent on destroying the West, thanks to it's forefather and founder, Muhammad. Also, as I have said above, freedom of religion is fine. Freedom of any religion to infiltrate our judiciary or governing system is NOT and should be pushed back against. Sorry that you do not put value on the responsibility that we as Americans hold in terms of protecting our constitution and land...

You protect the Constitution by following it, not ignoring it.

640 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:12:18pm

re: #612 Pastorius

As such, we can never allow any Islamist political party to gain any legitimate political power in any part of the Western world.


Well the problem is how do you want to do that? If they get the votes how are you going to stop them? There's no constitutional means of banning political parties here in the US. In Europe, however, they can outlaw political parties (Vlaams Block was outlawed). Once again this is the wrong approach. You can not preserve freedom and democracy by limiting freedom and democracy.

641 nyc redneck  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:12:31pm

re: #538 tfc3rid

McCain is a waste at this point...

i don't feel too kindly towards him either.
he has been a disappointment.

642 hazzyday  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:12:36pm

The thing about banned books it makes you think that you should go read them.

643 albusteve  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:12:37pm

re: #600 MandyManners

I fart in your general direction.

that's probably even worse by a wide margin....give us some warning please

644 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:12:37pm

re: #615 Born_to_lose

Gee, you want to be free to express YOUR opinions, yet advocate denying that to others you do not agree with.

HOW VERY PROGRESSIVE OF YOU, TROLL!

645 jantjepietje  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:13:04pm

re: #468 FurryOldGuyJeans

Well the point is that the things you quoted do not really give insight in to the current law I follow duch politics since I can read trust me I know
The whole debate in parliament you quoted is pure speculation from members of parliament about the law no actual law or policy was made
The entire hate speech laws are basically made by jurisprudence very little is specifically in the laws itself that is why I said that convinction sort of depends on the mood of the judge
Anyway since Pim Fortuijn jurisprudence has taken a dramatic shift towards more free speech so really no one knows if someone would get convicted now or not for trading in mein kampf books

646 Born_to_lose  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:13:09pm

re: #618 MandyManners

Should Sharia Law make an appearance in our political system, you and I will be the first to fall victim to it. Sure you are ready for that? Sorry, but Judaism and Christianity do not threaten the existence of Islam. May question it in it's entirety, but DOE NOT call for the killing, conquering and subjugation of it's adhearants. Therefore, using Saudi Arabia in reference to my opinion is worthless.

647 yma o hyd  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:13:28pm

re: #573 NelsFree

It does NOT say "the right of the people peaceably to assemble BOMBS". If Muslims engage in violent acts because the Qu'ran said they should do it, what then!?

There are criminal laws, no?

It is pernicious that the Left has used the excuse 'because my religion orders me to do this' as a valid point of defense.
Think of honour killings - are they murder, pure and simple, and thus to be prosecuted in courts of law as any other murder, or sre they 'excused' because of religion?
I would hope that the law is blind to religious and any other ideologicl excuse.

But - and thats the point: its the criminal act which gets prosecuted - not the religion which alledgedly 'allows' it.
At least it does in some countries ...

648 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:13:40pm

re: #635 albusteve

okay Mr. Nice Guy :)
I learned to really not like that man in the last year and it would not surprise me in the least if he had neferious designs all along with the election...and now it's obvious he's in BOs pocket....but he probably didnt toss it as you say..I'm just hayseed blunt about it

I didn't think he tossed the election until he snubbed Palin.
His daughter "won't talk about Palin".

Now, I think he intentionally tossed the election.

The question is "why?"

649 Guanxi88  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:13:46pm

re: #637 formercorpsman

I don't care if it rains or freezes, ...

Don't I have a pious mess
Such a crowd of holiness
Strung across the dashboard of my car

650 MrPaulRevere  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:13:49pm

re: #601 Sharmuta

I'm not interested in trying the failed notions of the europeans.

That (or a variant) should be chiseled in stone somewhere in Washington D.C.

651 saberry0530  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:13:51pm

re: #628 Charles

Oh, for Pete's sake. Not this crap again.

And what exactly do you plan to do with the millions of people who practice Islam currently? Round 'em up? Put 'em in camps? Expel 'em? A mass grave somewhere?

I suggest you think about what you're advocating here, because if you continue you're not going to have a very long stay at LGF.

Well Charles, he is born to lose after all.

652 offendi  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:14:00pm

re: #627 Kosh's Shadow

I hear yes, and, in the spirit of his other nominees, will be offering Osama the position of Director of Homeland Security.

Hmmm... so you mean to tell me he will not be the Obama administration's
coordinator of outreach to the islamic community?

653 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:14:33pm

re: #615 Born_to_lose

You feel sorry for me because I have an opinion, and am expressing it thusly? Did I say that violence should be brought upon these people? No, I call for a diplomatic discussion on reformation of the violence that IS actually advocated in the Islamic texts... I feel sorry for YOU that you continue to exist behind the veil of denial that is PC'ness....

I feel sorry for you because you sound like an anarchist. My bad.

654 Guanxi88  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:14:38pm

re: #652 offendi

Hmmm... so you mean to tell me he will not be the Obama administration's
coordinator of outreach to the islamic community?

emeritus, maybe?

655 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:14:43pm

re: #640 Killgore Trout

You can not preserve freedom and democracy by limiting freedom and democracy.

Er, well... actually, sometimes that very thing is necessary to that very end. It's not like FDR exactly presided over an unprecedented expansion of civil liberties during WWII.

656 Pastorius  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:14:43pm

Kilgore Trout,
You said: Well the problem is how do you want to do that? If they get the votes how are you going to stop them? There's no constitutional means of banning political parties here in the US. In Europe, however, they can outlaw political parties (Vlaams Block was outlawed). Once again this is the wrong approach. You can not preserve freedom and democracy by limiting freedom and democracy.


I say: Advocating for Sharia is advocating for the overthrow of the United States Constitution. As such, anyone who does so ought to be prosecuted and imprisoned.

Would you not agree?

657 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:14:52pm

re: #85 Ringo the Gringo

As far as I know all were banned for being "obscene" (Tropic of Cancer, Naked Lunch etc), not for hate speech or for political reasons.

I don't know about hate speech, but birth control information was banned from the mails, or distribution at one point.

658 vagabond trader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:15:32pm

re: #478 Walter L. Newton

Trouble is, Islam is not merely a religion. It is a political movement, with its own laws, banking system, and a large percentage of its adherents who migrate to the west have no intention of assimilating.Try and fix that.

659 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:16:21pm

re: #640 Killgore Trout

Well the problem is how do you want to do that? If they get the votes how are you going to stop them?

And yet.

Put it this way; if you were convinced that 1) a neo-Nazi party was on the verge of coming to power in the United States, and 2) you could prevent that from happening by using state power to smash their printing presses (or take away their servers, whatever), would you do it?

I sure would.

660 Lee Coller  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:16:30pm

re: #658 vagabond trader

Trouble is, Islam is not merely a religion. It is a political movement, with its own laws, banking system, and a large percentage of its adherents who migrate to the west have no intention of assimilating.Try and fix that.

I hope you're not agreeing with Born to Lose.

661 Gella  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:16:34pm

re: #658 vagabond trader

Trouble is, Islam is not merely a religion. It is a political movement, with its own laws, banking system, and a large percentage of its adherents who migrate to the west have no intention of assimilating.Try and fix that.


sometimes they remind me of Borg: resistance is futile

662 tfc3rid  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:16:41pm

re: #650 MrPaulRevere

That (or a variant) should be chiseled in stone somewhere in Washington D.C.

It's happening along with the chiseling of Obama's words from yesterday!

663 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:16:51pm

re: #612 Pastorius

In every country where Muslims are the majority, the Non-Muslim population steadily decreases. Even in Iraq, the Christians, Assyrians, and others are leaving or being killed. Should we wait until the majority religion in the USA is Islam to find that out?

664 Nevergiveup  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:16:51pm

Gadhafi says US should seek peace with bin Laden

[Link: www.jpost.com...]

So how does that sound to you all out there?

665 yma o hyd  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:16:56pm

re: #584 Born_to_lose

From your post:
"it is unfortunate that the general consensus has not gotten with the program on this, ..."

Whaaattt?
We must 'get with the program'?
There must be consensus?

What sort of attitude is that?

One which raises mi hackles, thats for sure!

666 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:16:58pm

re: #518 Occasional Reader

LOL. Or at least graphic warning photos.

667 Taqiyyotomist  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:17:05pm

re: #499 NelsFree

If I published an annotated Koran, highlighting the actual, non-taqiyya POINT of Islam, it would be banned. Definitely in Europe, probably in the USA. If not de facto banning, the publisher would be sued out of existance, I would be sued out of existance, hounded, villified, and probably killed. My killer would be freed on a technicality. I incited the bearded pedophile-worshipping goatfucker, something to that effect.

Sure, there is Spencer's book, Idiot's Guide to Islam, or whatever it's called, but that's a book with a title. I'm talking about publishing "Holy Quran, New Revised Taqiyyotomist Version"

It would not be allowed. Call it banning, call it disallowance, call it "no can do", I don't give a shit. Most of the same crowd who say Wilders is wrong, that books cannot and should not be banned, would scream bloody murder - not just the followers of the Insane SatanWorshipper Mohammed, but the insane left as well, would be demanding that my Version of the Quran be banned, that all bookstores which sell it be firebombed immediately after being sued out of existance, and that I be hanged at noon.

Solution? There is no solution.

668 hazzyday  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:17:07pm

re: #575 Pyrocles

Poor Vlad... His brother, Radu, willingly converted to Islam. :(

Sounds like a contraian , just to thumb his nose at his brother. lol

669 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:17:32pm
670 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:17:47pm

re: #620 infidel4ever

Hitler's German-American Bund never was banned, the predecessor to the 1959 American Nazi Party, even though a lot of it's members were interred during the war and deported after.

The second part of your comment I find patently repulsive. You might be lucky if you just get the stick attacking with imflammatory rhetoric and attacks like that.

671 Fat Jolly Penguin  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:17:51pm

re: #623 Truck Monkey

63 - Senator Hagel
64 - Senator Lindsay Graham
65 - Senator Arlen Spector
66 - Senator Mel Martinez

Any more?

Our very own Orrin Hatch, who has far outlived his usefulness in the Senate.

672 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:17:53pm

re: #607 Occasional Reader

Is this thread going Animal House?

673 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:17:53pm

re: #104 Walter L. Newton

Name me one book that was banned by the federal government?

Tropic of Cancer, Henry Miller

Banned by the U.S. Postal Service.

674 Born_to_lose  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:17:58pm

re: #651 saberry0530

She. I am a she.

675 offendi  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:17:58pm

All this Obama talk might be meaningless. Does anyone know when the Clintons will launch their coup? Will they seize the Lincoln Monument first?
And will Farrakhan's mother ship execute a daring rescue of Obama?

Frankly I think Washington will be a sitcom for the next 4 years as we do have the sitcom/celebrity President.

676 Guanxi88  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:18:07pm

The topic of "reform" in Islam keeps coming up. "oh, Islam needs to undergo a reformation," etc., etc.

Look, it's all well and good to try and make this case, but, as outsiders, we're hardly in a position to do more than talk about it in a very general way.

You cannot reform that of which you are not a part. You may as well wish for an end to Han dominance in China (a wish held by many ethnic minorities in China), for all the good it will do.

677 LGoPs  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:18:22pm

re: #661 Gella

sometimes they remind me of Borg: resistance is futile

Except the Borg have a sense of humor.....
/

678 Nevergiveup  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:18:34pm

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Wednesday he looks forward to "a new era of strong and effective partnership" with the United States under President Barack Obama who shares many of the same goals as the United Nations.

[Link: www.jpost.com...]

Why did I even wake up this morning?

679 eschew_obfuscation  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:18:35pm

re: #423 Lincolntf

The irony piles on top of itself. It's priceless.

Totally O/T, the Feb. issue of Scientific American just showed up. The banner headline? How Eating Meat Contributes to Global Warming. Is there no escape from this madness?

I tried to read SA for a while, but their politicization of science turned me off. Yours is another good example of that.

That headline begs the question. The initial premise is that there IS a long-term trend of global warming and that man is causing some part of it. Neither assertion is scientific fact, so the question of eating meat becomes moot.

(as I'm sure you're already aware ;-)

680 hazzyday  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:18:43pm

re: #664 Nevergiveup

Gadhafi says US should seek peace with bin Laden

[Link: www.jpost.com...]

So how does that sound to you all out there?

It sounds like he is telling the US to go to hell and don't come back.

681 Taqiyyotomist  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:18:47pm

re: #464 Walter L. Newton

Then tell us, flat out, what is your solution?

Translated: go ahead, jackass, tell us you want to kill them all. You know you want to say it. Do it. Come on, say it. Out with it, Nazi. COME ON, SAY IT.

682 DeafDog  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:18:59pm

re: #655 Occasional Reader

Er, well... actually, sometimes that very thing is necessary to that very end. It's not like FDR exactly presided over an unprecedented expansion of civil liberties during WWII.

Prior to 2000, our moral authority seemed to persevere through it all.

/just an observation

683 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:19:02pm

re: #658 vagabond trader

Trouble is, Islam is not merely a religion. It is a political movement, with its own laws, banking system, and a large percentage of its adherents who migrate to the west have no intention of assimilating.Try and fix that.

I don't have to fix that. As long as they become (or are) American citizens, as long as they don't break our laws, as long as we have a Constitution and Bill of Rights, it's fine for them to have any religious thoughts, doctrine etc.

If they cross the line, they will be subjected to the same laws and penalties as any other American.

Simple.

Or what is your final solution?

684 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:19:06pm
685 Kosh's Shadow  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:19:07pm

re: #652 offendi

Hmmm... so you mean to tell me he will not be the Obama administration's
coordinator of outreach to the islamic community?

Mullah Omar will handle that.

686 notutopia  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:19:10pm

re: #672 WriterMom

Is this thread going Animal House?

I'm under the coffee table...

687 unreconstructed rebel  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:19:11pm

re: #663 NelsFree

In every country where Muslims are the majority, the Non-Muslim population steadily decreases. Even in Iraq, the Christians, Assyrians, and others are leaving or being killed. Should we wait until the majority religion in the USA is Islam to find that out?

This christian understands that if that happens, it is because we christians failed.

If you can't make it in the marketplace if ideas, then ......... you lose.

688 jcm  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:19:29pm

re: #628 Charles

Oh, for Pete's sake. Not this crap again.

And what exactly do you plan to do with the millions of people who practice Islam currently? Round 'em up? Put 'em in camps? Expel 'em? A mass grave somewhere?

I suggest you think about what you're advocating here, because if you continue you're not going to have a very long stay at LGF.

A nic as a self fulfilling prophecy.

689 Spenser (with an S)  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:19:33pm

re: #655 Occasional Reader

re: #640 Killgore Trout

You can not preserve freedom and democracy by limiting freedom and democracy.

Er, well... actually, sometimes that very thing is necessary to that very end. It's not like FDR exactly presided over an unprecedented expansion of civil liberties during WWII.

Lincoln, either. Interesting discussion, we can either say those were large flaws in great men that we now say were worth it or they were a wartime necessity and might be needed again. Hmmm.

690 Gella  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:19:45pm

re: #677 LGoPs

Except the Borg have a sense of humor.....
/

only Queen has it, rest are carbon/mechanical mass

691 offendi  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:19:47pm

re: #654 Guanxi88

emeritus, maybe?

I thought Al-Zwaheri was in the running. He makes more public statements than Bin Laden, and does have a spiffy turban.

692 Pastorius  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:19:47pm

663 Nels Free,
Hell no, we shouldn't.

That's the opposite of my point.

My point is, it is NOT Democracy to allow a Islamist party to be elected into office in any Western country.

If you do not understand my point then please read it again. I would never want people to think I have even one iota of quarter for political Islam.

693 Dustyvet  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:20:03pm

re: #662 tfc3rid

It's happening along with the chiseling of Obama's words from yesterday!

Well considering that Obam's a Chicago Machine trained politician, you have to figure that there's a chiseler in there some place!

694 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:20:05pm
695 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:20:39pm

re: #624 Walter L. Newton


And, a big difference, there are many Muslims that don't care a twit about taking over the world for Islam violently. I know them, I spoken to them, they are as bother as you are about the direction some Islamist have taken.

They ignore the places in the Koran that speaks of Jihad.

They are Infidels! I KEEEL them! Seriously, taqqiya works for moderate Muslims, too. If things go well for Islam in America, I bet you would see the moderates become more fundamental.

696 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:20:42pm

re: #125 bulwrk

Teacher wants to expel Huck Finn


"The time has arrived to update the literature we use in high school classrooms," Foley wrote in a guest column this month for the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. "Barack Obama is president-elect of the United States, and novels that use the 'N-word' repeatedly need to go."

Foley, 48, teaches at a largely white suburban high school near Portland, Ore. Year after year, he said, he patiently explains to his students that Jim, a black man, is actually the hero of the novel, and that Huck comes to see the error of his ways and commits to helping Jim escape slavery. But many of them find the book dull and plodding, and they sometimes never get past the demeaning word Huck uses to refer to his friend.

Banging head against table. Interesting, though, because I teach "Of Mice and Men", and my students find it hilarious that I can't say "the N-word" aloud.

697 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:20:50pm

re: #630 Sharmuta

You are naive if you think we can either force a religion to reform or no violence will occur if we outright ban it.

Naive is being generous. Outright stupid seems to be more appropriate.

698 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:20:55pm

re: #664 Nevergiveup

Gadhafi says US should seek peace with bin Laden

[Link: www.jpost.com...]

So how does that sound to you all out there?


Sounds to me like we should have some F-111s fueled up and ready to go. (I choose the Aardvark for old times' sake.)

699 Dustyvet  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:21:06pm

re: #672 WriterMom

Is this thread going Animal House?

Hiding keyboard before the Food Fight starts...

700 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:21:06pm

This McCain bashing is too damn much.
He deserved our respect prior to the election and deserves it today.
Please!

701 2by2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:21:50pm

re: #685 Kosh's Shadow

Mullah Omar will handle that.

He looks it

702 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:22:04pm

re: #612 Pastorius

Sharia is anathema to Western Civilization.

As such, we can never allow any Islamist political party to gain any legitimate political power in any part of the Western world.

I think that is the main point. You can't have allegience to Sharia and democracy-they cannot coexist. That is why there are no Sharia based democracies.

703 Kosh's Shadow  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:22:09pm

re: #658 vagabond trader

Trouble is, Islam is not merely a religion. It is a political movement, with its own laws, banking system, and a large percentage of its adherents who migrate to the west have no intention of assimilating.Try and fix that.

You require that the Muslims in the US have to adhere to US laws. They cannot discriminate illegally (e.g. refusing blind people because of dogs); they cannot engage in "honor killings"; they cannot advocate for the extermination of adherents of other religions; etc. If they whine, they're told "This is the US. If you want a country ruled that way, go somewhere else."
There will be many who stay and keep their version of their religion.

704 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:22:10pm

re: #667 Taqiyyotomist

[Link: www.prophetofdoom.net...]

705 Nevergiveup  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:22:29pm

re: #700 unrealizedviewpoint

This McCain bashing is too damn much.
He deserved our respect prior to the election and deserves it today.
Please!

Unfortunately he has earned the bashing also.

706 Lincolntf  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:22:42pm

re: #679 eschew_obfuscation

They might as well have a headline that says How Human Progress is Contributing to the Decline of Humanity. It's such a joke.
And Scientific American was one of the mags I actually wanted in order to read something that wasn't full of politicized garbage. More irony for me, I guess.

707 Guanxi88  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:22:49pm

re: #683 Walter L. Newton

I don't have to fix that. As long as they become (or are) American citizens, as long as they don't break our laws, as long as we have a Constitution and Bill of Rights, it's fine for them to have any religious thoughts, doctrine etc.

If they cross the line, they will be subjected to the same laws and penalties as any other American.

Simple.

Or what is your final solution?

There you go, people! Equality under the law; the radical concept that makes the USA one of the last decent places on earth to live.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

708 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:22:55pm

re: #697 FurryOldGuyJeans

born to lose would probably find a more receptive audience at jihad watch.

709 2by2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:22:57pm

re: #701 2by2

He looks it

sorry, thought I read Muamar will handle that.....

710 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:23:00pm

re: #689 Spenser (with an S)

Lincoln, either. Interesting discussion, we can either say those were large flaws in great men that we now say were worth it or they were a wartime necessity and might be needed again. Hmmm.

I think without question SOME limitations on "freedom" were necessary to win, say, World War II. For one thing, you had to have mass conscription; that's some pretty serious freedom-constraint right there. Nor could you have a situation in which journalists were perfectly free to blabber "FLASH! Cross-channel invasion will land on Normandy Beaches early morning June 6th! Exclusive!".

711 vagabond trader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:23:05pm

re: #660 Lee Coller

Lot of hope going around these days. What I stated is a fact, refute it if you can.

712 albusteve  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:23:07pm

re: #700 unrealizedviewpoint

This McCain bashing is too damn much.
He deserved our respect prior to the election and deserves it today.
Please!

I'll say what I want about McCain...this is a marketplace of opinion and ideas

713 Achilles Tang  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:23:12pm

re: #624 Walter L. Newton


And, a big difference, there are many Muslims that don't care a twit about taking over the world for Islam violently. I know them, I spoken to them, they are as bother as you are about the direction some Islamist have taken.

They ignore the places in the Koran that speaks of Jihad.

Yes, there are such Muslims, but the truth is they are not Muslims according to the religion; they are Cultural Muslims only.

Even though there are Christians who take every word in the bible as literal from God, most do not make that claim.

Islam on the other hand considers every word of the Koran to be the direct word of God and anyone who claims differently is an apostate. I doubt very much that those you refer to are willing to state that to other Muslims they do not know, let alone to the press.

714 Gella  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:23:27pm

re: #706 Lincolntf

They might as well have a headline that says How Human Progress is Contributing to the Decline of Humanity. It's such a joke.
And Scientific American was one of the mags I actually wanted in order to read something that wasn't full of politicized garbage. More irony for me, I guess.

that is called PETA

715 hazzyday  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:23:32pm

Islam = worst religion ever.. well maybe that Phelps guy who protests funerals is worse.

You judge a tree by the fruit it bears.

716 Pastorius  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:23:33pm

Communist Party leaders convicted of sedition:

[Link: www.brainyhistory.com...]

This is what ought to happen to Sharia advocates in the U.S.

717 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:23:43pm

re: #700 unrealizedviewpoint

He prided himself on being a maverick-on being the Republican that the Democrats could get along with-and lost. He also allowed some pretty shameless attacks on Sarah Palin to go unanswered. Make your bed and lie in it...

718 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:23:54pm

re: #695 NelsFree

They are Infidels! I KEEEL them! Seriously, taqqiya works for moderate Muslims, too. If things go well for Islam in America, I bet you would see the moderates become more fundamental.

Fear works for moderate Muslims. How would you react if you lived, daily, among believers, and some of those believers may be "ratting" on you to some more radical members of your mosque.

This builds up a fear, even if your mosque has NO radicals attending your mosque.

719 albusteve  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:24:06pm

re: #708 Sharmuta

born to lose would probably find a more receptive audience at jihad watch.

that's where he came from to get here I'd wager

720 jcm  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:24:07pm

re: #669 Iron Fist

When I was very young I had an Aunt (add three or four "greats" in there; I don't recall how many any more) who was born during Reconstruction. Her father had been a Senator after the Civil War. She referred to me as "Master" and my sister as "Missy", and called it the War of Northern Aggression.

I don't remember much more about her. I think I was five when she died. She had seen a lot of history in her hundred years or so.

Wiki....


Master was retained as an address for boys or young men. By the late 19th century, etiquette dictated that men be addressed as Mister, boys under 13 years old be addressed as Master, and from 15 to the age of maturity males not be accorded courtesy titles.

This may have been the source of you Aunt's use of that title. It is not always associated with slavery.

721 Kosh's Shadow  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:24:13pm

re: #678 Nevergiveup

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Wednesday he looks forward to "a new era of strong and effective partnership" with the United States under President Barack Obama who shares many of the same goals as the United Nations.

[Link: www.jpost.com...]

Why did I even wake up this morning?

I'm going to watch the most recent Battlestar Galactica to cheer up.
(If anyone else watched it, they'll know what I mean, but no spoilers for those who haven't)

722 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:24:21pm
723 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:24:38pm

re: #683 Walter L. Newton

Or what is your final solution?

Awkward language alert.

724 Taqiyyotomist  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:25:15pm

Islam already underwent a Reformation, in 1979, at the urging and guidance of Ayatollah Khomeini. That is precisely why the recent uptick in murder-for-Allah worldwide since then.

Reformation means a Return To Pure Doctrine.
The purer Islam is, the more murderous. Plain and simple.

I think people who are naively wishing and hoping for a hopenchangey change in Islam for the better (less murderous) need to quit using the word "Reformation". Deformation, perhaps, is the word you weren't looking for.

725 offendi  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:25:30pm

It's been at least 24 hours of the Obama administration so when are we invading Pakistan?
How about making the Reverend Wright our new ambassador to Pakistan and Jimmy Carter our new ambassador to Iran?

I am so not seeing change that I can believe in.

726 Guanxi88  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:25:31pm

re: #723 WriterMom

Awkward language alert.

Snarky choice by Walter, and dead-on.

727 hazzyday  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:25:45pm

re: #717 WriterMom

He prided himself on being a maverick-on being the Republican that the Democrats could get along with-and lost. He also allowed some pretty shameless attacks on Sarah Palin to go unanswered. Make your bed and lie in it...

As far as I can tell he still hasn't stuck up for Sarah Palin like he is for Pres. Obama. He should be doing more for her, if he really is the fair man he wants to project. Maybe the media just isn't covering it or something.

728 zombie  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:26:12pm

re: #646 Born_to_lose

Should Sharia Law make an appearance in our political system, you and I will be the first to fall victim to it.

Actually, no, the first people to fall victim to shari'a will be Muslim women. That is already happening in England, where shari'a courts, with the blessing of the British government, come down with discriminatory rulings against women, in the realms of inheritances, marital abuse, divorces, etc.

However, at the risk of accumulating down-dings, I will partially agree with you on one point:

Islam is not exactly a religion is the sense that we have defined religion from our Western point of reference. Yes, this entity called "Islam" does have a spiritual aspect, and is thus partly "religious," but it also is a military doctrine, and a political ideology, and a mechanism for social control, and complete legal system, and a series of inviolable guidelines for even the most intimate minutiae of personal behavior. As such, islam is more of an all-encompassing philosophy, not really a religion. The key is, in a society where there is total shari'a, there is no secularism at all. It's not like Islam takes care of the spiritual side of things while politicians and generals and policemen and judges and mothers and human beings take care of everything else: Islam covers everything, in a fully Islamic society.

That's what makes it so scary.

I find much of Islam's philosophy to to be totalitarian in nature, but even if I didn't disagree with the specifics of Islamic teachings, I would find the notion of an all-emcompassing social system, which (according to shari'a and doctrine) is unchangeable and unncriticizable, to be my greatest nightmare. A world under shari'a would make 17th-century Puritan New England look like an anarchist riot.

729 sattv4u2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:26:12pm

re: #722 buzzsawmonkey

"The time has arrived to update the literature we use in high school classrooms,"

Hey ,,, Teacher ,,,,, there's a reason why something is called a CLASSIC ,, not a RECENT

730 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:26:24pm

re: #720 jcm

This may have been the source of you Aunt's use of that title. It is not always associated with slavery.

As long as the last name isn't Bates.

731 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:26:36pm
732 DeafDog  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:26:41pm

re: #700 unrealizedviewpoint

This McCain bashing is too damn much.
He deserved our respect prior to the election and deserves it today.
Please!

Prior to the election, I agree. I think he lost because he had no glibness when discussing the economy. That's our fault for nominating him, not his.

Since the election, however, he seems to be struggling with it means to be "the loyal opposition." To me, there's no need for him to advocate for Obama. He should be advocationg - still - the free market and strong defense policies that he advocated during the campaign.

733 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:26:47pm

re: #700 unrealizedviewpoint

This McCain bashing is too damn much.
He deserved our respect prior to the election and deserves it today.
Please!

I can respectfully bash him, right?

734 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:27:36pm

re: #658 vagabond trader

Trouble is, Islam is not merely a religion. It is a political movement, with its own laws, banking system, and a large percentage of its adherents who migrate to the west have no intention of assimilating.Try and fix that.

I would stipulate that Islam is not merely a religion, and has it's own laws, etc.

The other problem is that we are required to 'tolerate' it, as long as it does not specifically threaten us. Banning it outright would require us to violate our own rules. By your reasoning, we should also be banning some sects of Christianity that we currently buy furniture from.

The bigger problem is the MSM. Arguments for and against that (or a host of other problems) should be highly visible and public on their part. That's where we should be getting our information to make judgments and form opinions.

Good solutions to the problem will happen when good information is distributed. The public does not (and doesn't have time) to carefully research all topics without being pointed to the proper place.

735 LGoPs  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:27:56pm

re: #694 Iron Fist

You've got that right. Just enough that the Donks will be able to claim that everything that they do is "bipartisan". So they can blame the Republicans when their shitty policies go to hell in a handbasket.

Man that's a good point. With even one or two idiot Republicans siding with the Dems, they will have all the cover they need with the help of the media to never get pinned with accountability for anything.
Jeeez freakin' Loooeeez....don't these numbnuts understand that? Do they have at least 2 brain cells in their head that occasionally collide and produce a thought and warn them that they will only be used as tools......
Their #1 freakin rule should be "If you can't do any good for your side, at least do no harm"..........Sheesh.

736 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:27:59pm

re: #656 Pastorius

I say: Advocating for Sharia is advocating for the overthrow of the United States Constitution. As such, anyone who does so ought to be prosecuted and imprisoned.

Would you not agree?

Nope. People here in the US are allowed to advocate all sorts of horrible and distasteful ideas including fascism, communism, anarchy, monarchy, etc. We have a free market place of ideas and some of the ideas stink but the market must remain free and open. To start putting limits on freedom of ideas is very dangerous as Geert and the rest of Europe is now starting to learn.

737 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:28:08pm

re: #722 buzzsawmonkey

And isn't the teacher's reasoning exactly backwards?

"Barack Obama is president-elect of the United States, and novels that use the 'N-word' repeatedly need to go."

Wouldn't the election of a black man to the presidency indicate that we've matured enough on the subject to be able to read a work of literature with "the N-word" without causing harm?

738 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:28:17pm

re: #626 Born_to_lose

You are doing fine enough being a mockery all by yourself with your advocation of draconian un-Constitutional measures.

And that you can't see the SA connection is proof enough of where your sympathies lie.

739 jcm  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:28:20pm

re: #730 MandyManners

As long as the last name isn't Bates.

One self administered *whack* is order.
;-P

740 lawhawk  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:28:31pm

re: #721 Kosh's Shadow

I'm going to watch the most recent Battlestar Galactica to cheer up.
(If anyone else watched it, they'll know what I mean, but no spoilers for those who haven't)

If you do say something untoward, you'll be airlocked. /

741 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:28:42pm

re: #728 zombie

That's the point I was trying to make up thread. There can't be an "Islamic democracy" because no such thing-according to Islam-can exist. By the way-there is some push back in the UK, with the forced marriage laws. But it may be too late for the UK.

742 opnion  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:28:56pm

re: #583 Killgore Trout

He's being prosecuted for the film Fitna. Our debate here about the Quran ban is a side issue about Geert's character.

It looks like he is being prosecuted for the film AND comparing the koran to Mein Kampf.
It could also refer to the film, but grammaticaly it doesn't read that way.
It looks like two seperate 'transgressions"

743 Truck Monkey  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:29:10pm

re: #702 WriterMom

I think that is the main point. You can't have allegience to Sharia and democracy-they cannot coexist. That is why there are no Sharia based democracies.

I think Afghanistan is giving it a go. It's not going to work out well I believe.

744 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:29:11pm

re: #713 Naso Tang

Yes, there are such Muslims, but the truth is they are not Muslims according to the religion; they are Cultural Muslims only.

Even though there are Christians who take every word in the bible as literal from God, most do not make that claim.

Islam on the other hand considers every word of the Koran to be the direct word of God and anyone who claims differently is an apostate. I doubt very much that those you refer to are willing to state that to other Muslims they do not know, let alone to the press.

Moot argument. Back to that old "they're not really Muslim, they're not really Christian etc."

Well, look if we kept saying that, oh lets' say, in the middle ages. Those reformation guys, they're not really Christians, let's ban them (which was what happened at times).

If the "banning" worked, well, what would the world be like today? No, I'll keep support the Muslims who want to see reform, whether some of they're religion sees them as apostates or not.

Or what is your final solution?

745 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:29:11pm

re: #728 zombie

I don't think anyone is disagreeing with "born to lose" as far as islam being a political ideology. The problem here is the solutions being posed.

746 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:29:19pm

re: #731 Iron Fist

You should bring in an NWA CD, and play a little of it whennever that word is in the text. If nothing else, it would be amusing.


What does Northwest Airlines have to do with anything?

/

747 maddogg  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:29:29pm

re: #619 NelsFree

Source? Please?

I was sick at home Monday a week ago and had to sit through "The Real Dracula" on The History Channel. 3 times.
Apparently, on week days, The History Channel runs the same 3 programs all day long. I believe their version came from historians in his native Romania, and featured footage and recreations of the actual places that Vlad built and occupied. Including locations where he committed his atrocities, which were fairly commonplace for the times, which were rather brutal by modern standards.

748 vagabond trader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:29:42pm

re: #734 jwb7605

Where do I suggest banning anything. Please re-read my simple statement of fact.

749 Guanxi88  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:30:26pm

re: #724 Taqiyyotomist

Islam already underwent a Reformation, in 1979, at the urging and guidance of Ayatollah Khomeini. That is precisely why the recent uptick in murder-for-Allah worldwide since then.

Reformation means a Return To Pure Doctrine.
The purer Islam is, the more murderous. Plain and simple.

I think people who are naively wishing and hoping for a hopenchangey change in Islam for the better (less murderous) need to quit using the word "Reformation". Deformation, perhaps, is the word you weren't looking for.

Look, it's like this: if Khomeinism is to be the reformation of Islam (an affair in which I have no participation or control), then Islam, muslims, and the West are well and truly f*ucked. To my mind, the greatest tragedy of their history is that as an heir to earlier civilizations and cultures (Persian, Byzantine, etc) Islam seems to have acted much like ibn Khaldun's desert (bedouin) conqueror, and pitched tents in the palace. They never really assimilated the material available to them, and so, except for some real promise in the early days (I'm thinking of al-Farabi, Averroes, et. al, all of whom were decidedly NOT within the mainstream of the Muslim intellectual mind), they've not done much of anything with what the conquered.

If that's to be their future and legacy, then they, and we, are screwed.

750 zombie  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:30:32pm
#736 Killgore Trout
re: #656 Pastorius

I say: Advocating for Sharia is advocating for the overthrow of the United States Constitution. As such, anyone who does so ought to be prosecuted and imprisoned.

Would you not agree?

Nope. People here in the US are allowed to advocate all sorts of horrible and distasteful ideas including fascism, communism, anarchy, monarchy, etc. We have a free market place of ideas and some of the ideas stink but the market must remain free and open. To start putting limits on freedom of ideas is very dangerous as Geert and the rest of Europe is now starting to learn.

Got to agree with Killgore on this one: Banning ideas and speech by fiat is almost always a bad idea. The best recourse is enlightenment, and exposure.

751 eschew_obfuscation  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:30:34pm

re: #710 Occasional Reader

I think without question SOME limitations on "freedom" were necessary to win, say, World War II. For one thing, you had to have mass conscription; that's some pretty serious freedom-constraint right there. Nor could you have a situation in which journalists were perfectly free to blabber "FLASH! Cross-channel invasion will land on Normandy Beaches early morning June 6th! Exclusive!".

I thought I read that in an old copy of the New York Times!?

752 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:30:37pm

re: #736 Killgore Trout

Nope. People here in the US are allowed to advocate all sorts of horrible and distasteful ideas including fascism, communism, anarchy, monarchy, etc. We have a free market place of ideas and some of the ideas stink but the market must remain free and open. To start putting limits on freedom of ideas is very dangerous as Geert and the rest of Europe is now starting to learn.

Please see my question in #659 above. I'm interested in your take.

753 Taqiyyotomist  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:30:45pm

re: #745 Sharmuta

I don't think anyone is disagreeing with "born to lose" as far as islam being a political ideology. The problem here is the solutions being posed.

Or any solutions being posed.
There is no solution.

754 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:31:16pm

Democracies are ruled by majorities. What would happen in the US if Muslims outbred everyone and became the majority? Walter, what's your solution?

755 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:31:30pm

re: #700 unrealizedviewpoint

This McCain bashing is too damn much.
He deserved our respect prior to the election and deserves it today.
Please!

I have always respected the man for his military service, his political leanings I find repugnant.

756 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:31:32pm

re: #702 WriterMom

I think that is the main point. You can't have allegience to Sharia and democracy-they cannot coexist. That is why there are no Sharia based democracies.

Iraq's Constitution states that the Qu'ran is the sole source of law, or words to that effect. The US tried to get that removed, the Iraqis refused. By the way, what is the Arabic word for "Democracy"? There isn't one. If you are told, "Shura", that is a term for 'a deliberative body of Muslims only, used for establishing laws and resolving conflicts'. I had to look if up after I challenged a Muslim on Democracy. He used taqqiya, of course.

757 Kosh's Shadow  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:31:32pm

re: #740 lawhawk

If you do say something untoward, you'll be airlocked. /

Frak it, I'm no skin job.

But BSG is not exactly a show where muppets come out and dance; it has gotten very depressing. My remark is that the world seems to be worse. Or maybe we're heading towards what season 4.0 ended on.

758 J.S.  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:31:51pm

re: #683 Walter L. Newton

If I can just jump in here...I think there's another problem...Sometimes what happens is that you get a community which decides to isolate itself...Remember those religious cults in the U.S. (some off-shoot of Mormons) who practiced polygamy and some were accused of child abuse, etc? There was a report about a wealthy Pakistani in Canada who bought acres and acres of land, and built houses, mosque, etc., and would sell only to Muslims -- creating, essentially, a Muslim-only community...own schools, own mosques, own newspapers, own book-stores, own dress codes, language, customs, etc; its own isolated, insular society, separate from secular, mainstream Canadian society...should this be tolerated? (frankly, I'm divided on this issue...)

759 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:31:54pm

re: #743 Truck Monkey

I think it's a Catch-22. The free world could not let the Taliban run the show in Afghanistan. Yet-when I read about the resurgance of the Taliban, and how the political leadership still defers to Islam and sharia-when our soldiers are being murdered by terrorists-I feel very torn. I'm not in any way a 'bring the troops home' kind of person, but I feel very angry when Afghanistan and Iraq do things like met out sharia justice, or charge journalists with blasphemy, or enforce the boycott of Israel-at the expense of our soldiers' lives.

760 Ben Hur  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:31:57pm

re: #702 WriterMom

I think that is the main point. You can't have allegience to Sharia and democracy-they cannot coexist. That is why there are no Sharia based democracies.

"Palestine" and LEbanon, according to the Bush administration.

They count those two in there "spreading democracy" in the mid-east travelling side show.

761 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:31:58pm

re: #748 vagabond trader

Where do I suggest banning anything. Please re-read my simple statement of fact.

Then, I have already asked you, what is your final solution?

762 offendi  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:32:16pm

re: #722 buzzsawmonkey

I would rather have the nutty leftist kook teacher type of thing than the pedophile having sex with underage kids teacher type of thing that seems so prevalent today.

763 nikis-knight  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:32:43pm

re: #722 buzzsawmonkey

That is because the students have no attention span, and probably--having never learned to read standard English with any ease--have difficulty with the dialect in which the book is written, and the archaisms which Huck's speech uses.

Too frickin' bad. Even if they find the book "dull and plodding," it is their job to learn how to deal with, and analyze, things which may appear to be dull and plodding. They will not be spending 40+ years of working life playing "World of Warcraft."


More to the point, it's an English teacher's job to teach analysis of works that may seem dull and plodding at first.

764 yma o hyd  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:32:48pm

re: #703 Kosh's Shadow

You require that the Muslims in the US have to adhere to US laws. They cannot discriminate illegally (e.g. refusing blind people because of dogs); they cannot engage in "honor killings"; they cannot advocate for the extermination of adherents of other religions; etc. If they whine, they're told "This is the US. If you want a country ruled that way, go somewhere else."
There will be many who stay and keep their version of their religion.

Only trouble is, as we've experienced in the last ten years or so, that a leftie, PC, moonbatty government will prefer to listen to the whiners, because they are downtrodden victims, in their eyse.
And, as we've also noticed - the Lefties and feminists don't give a toss about laws and rights being there for all - else why close eyes to or even excuse honour killings and other unspeakable practices 'because its their culture'.

Thats the trouble - to reinforce the laws as they stand needs a government which respects these laws, and does not try to water them down for the whiners!

765 Honorary Yooper  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:32:56pm

re: #664 Nevergiveup

Gadhafi says US should seek peace with bin Laden

[Link: www.jpost.com...]

So how does that sound to you all out there?

I nicely, and unequivically extend my middle finger in Gadhafi's direction while asking him politely to fuck off.

766 Truck Monkey  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:33:05pm

re: #717 WriterMom

He prided himself on being a maverick-on being the Republican that the Democrats could get along with-and lost. He also allowed some pretty shameless attacks on Sarah Palin to go unanswered. Make your bed and lie in it...

Why did McCain think that Americans would vote for a Democrat Lite when they could get the real deal in Barry?

767 Pastorius  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:33:08pm

736 Kilgore Trout,
So what do you think ought to be done about Islamism? Should we just wait, like the Dutch politician said, until Muslims have enough people to vote Sharia into law?

Or perhaps, we ought to wait until they have enough to amend the Constitution? Is that it?

If you have any ideas, I'd like to hear them.

768 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:33:10pm

re: #748 vagabond trader

Where do I suggest banning anything. Please re-read my simple statement of fact.

I read into the last sentence: Try and fix that.

769 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:33:15pm

re: #760 Ben Hur

PUH.
LEASE.

770 nikis-knight  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:33:20pm

re: #723 WriterMom

Awkward language alert.

Godwin's law alert.

771 DeafDog  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:33:42pm

re: #743 Truck Monkey

I think Afghanistan is giving it a go. It's not going to work out well I believe.

Consider Iraq and Indonesia, too.

It ain't perfect, but they are giving it a go, which is nice.

772 2by2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:33:50pm

re: #736 Killgore Trout

Nope. People here in the US are allowed to advocate all sorts of horrible and distasteful ideas including fascism, communism, anarchy, monarchy, etc. We have a free market place of ideas and some of the ideas stink but the market must remain free and open. To start putting limits on freedom of ideas is very dangerous as Geert and the rest of Europe is now starting to learn.

They will not learn.
The modus operandi is different.
Europe has never been a free market place of ideas. They had a lot of them, but ultimately these ideas ended up to be an ax in the hands of those who attended power through them.

773 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:33:57pm

re: McCain

You're all mostly correct. I'm wrong here (mostly).

774 sattv4u2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:34:24pm

re: #748 vagabond trader

Where do I suggest banning anything. Please re-read my simple statement of fact.

The basis of your statement was a false premise to begin with. All Muslims that I know (and there are at least dozens from all parts of the world,, Indonesia,, Iran ,, Iraq ,,,Pakistan ,,,Bosnia0 have ALL assimilated to our culture. They keep their religion as I do (Catholic). They take from theirs what they beleive and ignore the rest, again, like I do!

775 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:34:37pm

re: #754 faraway

Democracies are ruled by majorities. What would happen in the US if Muslims outbred everyone and became the majority? Walter, what's your solution?

This isn't a democracy- it's a republic. One that was designed to protect the rights of the minority from the tyranny of the majority. The Constitution would have to be repealed completely for shari'a to be implemented.

776 Kosh's Shadow  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:34:45pm

re: #764 yma o hyd

Only trouble is, as we've experienced in the last ten years or so, that a leftie, PC, moonbatty government will prefer to listen to the whiners, because they are downtrodden victims, in their eyse.
And, as we've also noticed - the Lefties and feminists don't give a toss about laws and rights being there for all - else why close eyes to or even excuse honour killings and other unspeakable practices 'because its their culture'.

Thats the trouble - to reinforce the laws as they stand needs a government which respects these laws, and does not try to water them down for the whiners!

The problem here is the leftists. The crocodile will eat them eventually; they just don't realize it.
But look at the current administration. I'm not so hopeful.

777 Charles Johnson  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:34:56pm

re: #656 Pastorius

I say: Advocating for Sharia is advocating for the overthrow of the United States Constitution. As such, anyone who does so ought to be prosecuted and imprisoned.

We also have some extremist Christian groups in this country who openly advocate for the overthrow of the Constitution, and the establishment of a theocracy. Some of them are very influential in government -- check out the Christian Reconstructionist movement if you don't believe me. Do you want to prosecute and imprison them too?

778 lawhawk  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:34:59pm

Khadafi says that the US should make peace with bin Laden. Or is that Quadafi. Or Gadafi. Whatever.

He's thinking that the US will just roll over and suck up to terrorists and dictators.

779 jcm  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:35:06pm

Born to Lose,

By banning Islam you also ban the voice of moderation.

American Islamic Forum for Democracy.

Mission: We proud citizens of the United States of America join together as devoted and patriotic citizens and as devout Muslims in this forum in order to serve as a vehicle for the discussion and public awareness of the complete compatibility of America’s founding principles with the very personal faith of Islam which we practice.

We need to encourage the voices like Zuhdi Jasser, while be critical and aware of the radicals. If banned Dr. Jasser is silenced, and the radicals foment their ideas underground and unopposed.

780 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:35:16pm

re: #754 faraway

Democracies are ruled by majorities. What would happen in the US if Muslims outbred everyone and became the majority? Walter, what's your solution?

I don't care. We still have a Constitution and a Bill of Rights. Are you are suggesting that those two documents would become obsolete. If we had a majority of Muslims in this country, as long as the country is still being run by those two documents, no problem.

If Muslims tried to change those documents, or make them moot, than I think you would find a legal right of citizens to take to the streets, to protect the country of that sort of take over.

But, unless that is happening, then we still have those documents and we follow the rule of law.

And what would you like to do?

781 Taqiyyotomist  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:35:20pm

Walter, why are you doing this? Badgering. Baiting.

What the hell is your solution? Do you have one?

Seriously, I love ya, (not like that), but man. Are you going to try and get every single person who thinks Islam is, at its very core, a very evil thing, to say what you so obviously, and seemingly desparately want them to say?

782 Pyrocles  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:35:37pm

As our local Communist book store has plastered all over its front windows along with pictures of Che, Stalin, Mao, Obama, and derogatory pictures of Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Reagan: "Learn the TRUTH! READ BANNED BOOKS!"

re: #642 hazzyday

The thing about banned books it makes you think that you should go read them.

783 offendi  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:35:50pm

re: #721 Kosh's Shadow

I'm going to watch the most recent Battlestar Galactica to cheer up.
(If anyone else watched it, they'll know what I mean, but no spoilers for those who haven't)

At least you have good escapist entertainment. I have been adrift and lost since "The Shield" ended.

784 formercorpsman  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:36:12pm

re: #728 zombie

Well put.

Mine too.

785 opnion  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:36:17pm

re: #700 unrealizedviewpoint

This McCain bashing is too damn much.
He deserved our respect prior to the election and deserves it today.
Please!


I have to disagree with you. He has spent a Senate Career hanging out his whole party to dry. He ran at best a half hearted campaign & damn near endorsed his opponent. He tapped Sarah Palin & then stepped back when she was used for a pinata.
Even now he is trying to position himself as Obama's enforcer to Republican Senators. I do not respect him.

786 Nevergiveup  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:36:22pm

re: #778 lawhawk

Khadafi says that the US should make peace with bin Laden. Or is that Quadafi. Or Gadafi. Whatever.

He's thinking that the US will just roll over and suck up to terrorists and dictators.

Gee I wonder what gave him that Idea? Hum?

787 Kosh's Shadow  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:36:23pm

re: #772 2by2

They will not learn.
The modus operandi is different.
Europe has never been a free market place of ideas. They had a lot of them, but ultimately these ideas ended up to be an ax in the hands of those who attended power through them.

And I think that is happening here now. One of the fears I have of the 0bama administration.

788 Sheila Broflovski  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:36:43pm

re: #539 Occasional Reader

It's especially hard for me to criticize Geert Wilders, because I loved him as Jim, "The Waco Kid" in Blazing Saddles.

Not to mention the original Willy Wonka.

789 ThinkRight  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:36:55pm

re: #778 lawhawk

Khadafi says that the US should make peace with bin Laden. Or is that Quadafi. Or Gadafi. Whatever.

He's thinking that the US will just roll over and suck up to terrorists and dictators.


And Obama Hussein will stand up to them?
I am betting not

790 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:37:02pm

re: #775 Sharmuta

This isn't a democracy- it's a republic. One that was designed to protect the rights of the minority from the tyranny of the majority. The Constitution would have to be repealed completely for shari'a to be implemented.

Amazing how so few people have a real working knowledge of the Constitution with its protections of the minority, such as the Electoral College and the Bicameral Legislature.

791 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:37:14pm

re: #774 sattv4u2

The basis of your statement was a false premise to begin with. All Muslims that I know (and there are at least dozens from all parts of the world,, Indonesia,, Iran ,, Iraq ,,,Pakistan ,,,Bosnia0 have ALL assimilated to our culture. They keep their religion as I do (Catholic). They take from theirs what they beleive and ignore the rest, again, like I do!

Of course, if they had a charismatic leader that could unite them into one caliphate, would they vote for that leader? Of course they would.

792 2by2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:37:15pm

re: #778 lawhawk

Khadafi says that the US should make peace with bin Laden. Or is that Quadafi. Or Gadafi. Whatever.

He's thinking that the US will just roll over and suck up to terrorists and dictators.

It's GadhafiYour text to link..., and man does he have style......

793 Kosh's Shadow  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:37:23pm

re: #778 lawhawk

Khadafi says that the US should make peace with bin Laden. Or is that Quadafi. Or Gadafi. Whatever.

He's thinking that the US will just roll over and suck up to terrorists and dictators.

Well, we elected 0bama who said he'd talk to people like that without preconditions. I can understand why he thinks that way.

794 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:37:24pm

re: #780 Walter L. Newton

I don't care. We still have a Constitution and a Bill of Rights. Are you are suggesting that those two documents would become obsolete. If we had a majority of Muslims in this country, as long as the country is still being run by those two documents, no problem.

If Muslims tried to change those documents, or make them moot, than I think you would find a legal right of citizens to take to the streets, to protect the country of that sort of take over.

But, unless that is happening, then we still have those documents and we follow the rule of law.

And what would you like to do?


If Muslims ever change the documents, they will have the votes.

795 vagabond trader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:37:32pm

re: #761 Walter L. Newton

I stated a fact you apparently don't agree with, never proposed any solutions.

796 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:37:43pm

re: #775 Sharmuta

This isn't a democracy- it's a republic. One that was designed to protect the rights of the minority from the tyranny of the majority. The Constitution would have to be repealed completely for shari'a to be implemented.

Well, no, not "completely", just amended in key places. I think in the United States, we're nowhere near the point where that would be feasible.

But in other countries? We may wind up with a situation in a European country in the not too distant future that looks like Algeria, 1993. An Islamist party wins a free election on a promise that it will be the LAST election ever allowed, because they will usher in a perfect Islamic dictatorship. In the case of Algeria, the army stepped in. I wonder what will happen in Europe.

797 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:37:43pm

re: #724 Taqiyyotomist

You are referring to Shia Islam in Iran. Sunni Islam's reformation started earlier with Sayyid Qutb. Earlier still with Wahhab.

798 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:37:47pm

re: #790 FurryOldGuyJeans

Amazing how so few people have a real working knowledge of the Constitution with its protections of the minority, such as the Electoral College and the Bicameral Legislature.

Civics education in this country is abysmal.

799 lawhawk  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:37:50pm

re: #757 Kosh's Shadow

Well, Dirk Benedict doesn't like what they've done with the place. It's not a particularly cheerful place, and certainly one in which hope is a rare commodity.

How will the series end? Well, given the way things have been going, a whole lot of airlocking will be going on... I don't think they can end it any other way, unless the planet they believe is Earth isn't... and that the real one is just a stone's throw away...

800 sattv4u2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:38:10pm

re: #791 faraway

Of course, if they had a charismatic leader that could unite them into one caliphate, would they vote for that leader? Of course they would.

NO ,, just as I wouldn't vote for the Pope for President of the USA

801 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:38:11pm

re: #775 Sharmuta

This isn't a democracy- it's a republic.

Oh good lord, are you a 5th grader?

802 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:38:12pm

re: #752 Occasional Reader
Sorry it's a fast moving thread, I missed that one.....

Put it this way; if you were convinced that 1) a neo-Nazi party was on the verge of coming to power in the United States, and 2) you could prevent that from happening by using state power to smash their printing presses (or take away their servers, whatever), would you do it?

I sure would.

Interesting question. Hmmmmm....let me take a stab at this; If the Neo-nazis were coming to power by legal means (winning an election) I'm not sure imposing legal means to shut them down (ban them, jail the candidates, etc) would do any good. They'd still have the support of the people to win votes. Without a civil war to crush that popular base any legal/constitutional means would only be a cosmetic fix leaving the problem in place. The only two options would be to flee the country or engage in civil war against your fellow citizens.

803 MJ  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:38:14pm

Gadhafi says US should seek peace with bin Laden

But why is that any weirder than saying Israel should make peace with Hamas? Same difference.

804 nikis-knight  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:38:15pm

re: #728 zombie
Yeah. The fact that Islam is incompatible with other religions isn't really a problem, but it encompasses a worldview that is incompatible with freedom and democracy.
If people want to call themselves muslim for focusing only on the personal, spiritual aspects of it, that's great, and maybe one day that will be all it is, but at present the "religion" Islam brings a whole lot of political baggage with it where ever it goes that pose a lot of tricky questions for democracies that want to integrate people of all types into their way of life--without bringing about the end of that way of life.

805 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:38:16pm

re: #778 lawhawk

Khadafi says that the US should make peace with bin Laden. Or is that Quadafi. Or Gadafi. Whatever.

He's thinking that the US will just roll over and suck up to terrorists and dictators.

So far the new foreign policy seems to be doing just that

806 maddogg  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:38:39pm

re: #792 2by2

It's GadhafiYour text to link..., and man does he have style......

You can dress a rat in a tuxedo, but he's still just a rat.

807 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:38:55pm

re: #792 2by2

It's GadhafiYour text to link..., and man does he have style......

But, does he have a razor?

808 SWPaul  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:39:03pm

re: #792 2by2

He's lacking a pimp cane.

809 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:39:07pm

re: #777 Charles

We also have some extremist Christian groups in this country who openly advocate for the overthrow of the Constitution, and the establishment of a theocracy. Some of them are very influential in government -- check out the Christian Reconstructionist movement if you don't believe me. Do you want to prosecute and imprison them too?

There are dozens of christian groups who openly advocate for the establishment of a theocracy. Some believe they will help this along by converting people to their sect, some believe it will be done by the almighty striking the rest of the citizens of this country, and some preach, on the pulpit, weekly and in publications, an outright war with the US government.

IE (in order): Jehovah's Witnesses, Worldwide Church of God and Christian Identity Movement.

810 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:39:09pm

re: #794 jwb7605

If Muslims ever change the documents, they will have the votes.

Do you know what is required to amend the Constitution? A super majority in BOTH houses of Congress and another super majority of the states. It's not going to happen.

811 DeafDog  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:39:10pm

re: #754 faraway

Democracies are ruled by majorities. What would happen in the US if Muslims outbred everyone and became the majority? Walter, what's your solution?

This raises an interesting question, IMO, but in terms of economics, not religion.

Currently some 35% of the population gets government support. We are headed down the path, if you can believe Obama's rhetoric, where 60% or so will be on government support.

As the constitution protects religious beliefs, but does not protect economic beliefs, and as the Declaration of Independence is lost as a 'founding' document, maybe - just maybe - it's more likely that Capitalism will be banned before any religion.

812 abolitionist  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:39:10pm

The koran itself specifies that it should be left behind in Dar ul Islam whenever jihadists or other servants of allah journey into infidel lands, Dar ul Harb, for whatever purpose. This is something I never seem to see any discussion about. I don't recall the specific passage(s).

The significance of such a directive ought to be obvious to anyone with more than a few working brain cells -- to cover up and hide the truth about the mohamedans, ironically, from those very people whom the mohamedans condemn as kuffar/kaffir, and who (according to the koran) merit death for refusal to submit to the will and ways of allah.

So I don't believe the koran should be banned, especially not in Dar ul Harb, as that would be playing along with the death cult's own strategic directive. However, a national worldwide burn-your-own-koran day may have some merit. I'd recommend Fridays.

813 Taqiyyotomist  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:39:28pm

I need a cigarette. BBL all.
No offense intended, Walter. Emotional day.

814 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:39:29pm

re: #780 Walter L. Newton

If we had a majority of Muslims in this country, as long as the country is still being run by those two documents, no problem.

If Muslims tried to change those documents, or make them moot, than I think you would find a legal right of citizens to take to the streets, to protect the country of that sort of take over.

Of course, by that point, those citizens would be outnumbered, wouldn't they?

815 Nevergiveup  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:40:08pm

Unbelievable...Obama Becomes First President To Skip the "Salute To Heroes" Ball
—DrewM.

No time for Medal of Honor and Purple Heart recipients or paralyzed vets? Yeah, honeymoon...over.

[Link: ace.mu.nu...]

816 offendi  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:40:08pm

re: #778 lawhawk

Khadafi says that the US should make peace with bin Laden. Or is that Quadafi. Or Gadafi. Whatever.

He's thinking that the US will just roll over and suck up to terrorists and dictators.

If we really want to bring peace to the Middle East and end terrorism the best way to do it is by having a picture of a medical corpsman inspecting Bin Laden's molars, just like they had with Saddam Hussein.

The power of that imagery will do more to advance that cause than years of Obama kissing their asses negotiating with them.

817 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:40:09pm
818 Ben Hur  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:40:10pm

re: #801 faraway

Oh good lord, are you a 5th grader?


OOooooooo.....you're in troubelllllllll!

819 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:40:12pm

re: #796 Occasional Reader

Well, no, not "completely", just amended in key places. I think in the United States, we're nowhere near the point where that would be feasible.

But in other countries? We may wind up with a situation in a European country in the not too distant future that looks like Algeria, 1993. An Islamist party wins a free election on a promise that it will be the LAST election ever allowed, because they will usher in a perfect Islamic dictatorship. In the case of Algeria, the army stepped in. I wonder what will happen in Europe.

European history shows it will be a bloody transition.

820 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:40:17pm

re: #801 faraway

Oh good lord, are you a 5th grader?

She states a fact and you insult her personally?

Guess who's acting like a 5th grader?

821 sattv4u2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:40:35pm

re: #801 faraway

Oh good lord, are you a 5th grader?

A democracy os two wolves and one sheep voting on whats for lunch. Pure majority rules. That is NOT our system!

(maybe YOU should talk to your 5th grade teacher!)

822 Kosh's Shadow  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:40:54pm

re: #799 lawhawk

Well, Dirk Benedict doesn't like what they've done with the place. It's not a particularly cheerful place, and certainly one in which hope is a rare commodity.

Kind of how I feel about our new administration, despite his mantra of hope'n'change. I see changes coming, but I have to hope they're not the ones that I think they are.

823 Boolz  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:41:01pm

please remember that the First Amendment specifies that Congress shall make no law concerning free speech. It says nothing about what local communities standards are or should be. If free speech were a universal right, then people should be free to shout "fire" in crowded theaters, librarians should be forced to stock every single book ever written (since choosing not to stock certain books would be classified as "censorship"), and Charles shouldn't have the right to ban people off his site. Obviously, it don't work that way.

As far as child porn goes, states and local communities have every right to ban, boycott and criminalize the possession of it. But the Feds doing so should be considered Constitutionally murky at best. Note however, that only deals with the printed or video depictions of it. The actual acting and performing of it can still be federally illegal (maybe), and thus the printed/video depictions of it could still be seized by the Feds as evidence of the act itself.

As far as Fanny Hill goes, two points: 1. if it was banned twice, then I guess the first ban wasn't too effective. 2. I still rate it as one of the best Skinemax soft core porn films of all time (nostalgic memories of lonely yet hormone filled adolesence...sigh)

824 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:41:01pm

re: #774 sattv4u2

Again, Moderates= Infidels. Taqqiya, too.

825 ixolite  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:41:06pm

re: #508 rawmuse

The practice of impaling is still going on in Islam. There WAS a video of one on LiveLeak (I watched it once, and it was highly disturbing) it may still be there but I don't know. So I believe you.

That's a fake. It's from the "Faces of Death" series or a similiar movie.

826 Ben Hur  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:41:07pm

That was me as a 5th grader!

827 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:41:15pm

re: #810 Sharmuta

Do you know what is required to amend the Constitution? A super majority in BOTH houses of Congress and another super majority of the states. It's not going to happen.

You are completely correct, and I stand by my statement.
I hope your last sentence is correct.

828 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:41:22pm

re: #801 faraway

Reduced to ad hominem, huh?

829 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:41:47pm

re: #809 Walter L. Newton

There are dozens of christian groups who openly advocate for the establishment of a theocracy. Some believe they will help this along by converting people to their sect, some believe it will be done by the almighty striking the rest of the citizens of this country, and some preach, on the pulpit, weekly and in publications, an outright war with the US government.

IE (in order): Jehovah's Witnesses, Worldwide Church of God and Christian Identity Movement.

We also have crazy groups such as the Discovery Institute advocating a theocracy to promote their version of science.

830 Taqiyyotomist  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:41:54pm

re: #812 abolitionist

A damn good point.

831 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:41:55pm

re: #780 Walter L. Newton

And what would you like to do?

Not sure, Walter. Just pointing out that it's an inherent flaw in our form of government that Islamists (and others) are exploiting to their advantage all over the world.

We should be debating this issue. The survival of Western civilization may depend on it.

832 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:41:58pm

re: #799 lawhawk

Well, Dirk Benedict doesn't like what they've done with the place.

Dirk's not in a very strong bargaining position. It's not just that he's criticizing this season's or last season's BG plot developments; it's that he's saying that the laughably bad ORIGINAL BG was better. No dice, Dirk.

833 unreconstructed rebel  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:42:09pm

re: #790 FurryOldGuyJeans

Amazing how so few people have a real working knowledge of the Constitution with its protections of the minority, such as the Electoral College and the Bicameral Legislature.

The Electoral College was intended to be the fourth element in the system of checks and balances that is until the political parties figured out how to subvert it.

834 Pyrocles  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:42:15pm

Muslims like that need all our support. The future of Islam is theirs.

re: #779 jcm

Born to Lose,

By banning Islam you also ban the voice of moderation.

American Islamic Forum for Democracy.

We need to encourage the voices like Zuhdi Jasser, while be critical and aware of the radicals. If banned Dr. Jasser is silenced, and the radicals foment their ideas underground and unopposed.

835 infidel4ever  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:42:39pm

re: #742 opnion

It looks like he is being prosecuted for the film AND comparing the koran to Mein Kampf.
It could also refer to the film, but grammaticaly it doesn't read that way.
It looks like two seperate 'transgressions"

Here is the court decision:

Amsterdam Court of Appeal orders the criminal prosecution of the Member of Parliament of the Dutch Second Chamber Geert Wilders

On 21 January 2009 the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam ordered the criminal prosecution of the member of parliament Geert Wilders for the incitement to hatred and discrimination based on his statements in various media about moslims and their belief. In addition, the Court of Appeal considers criminal prosecution obvious for the insult of Islamic worshippers because of the comparisons made by Wilders of the islam with the nazism.


The Court of Appeal rendered judgment as a consequence of a number of complaints about the non-prosecution of Wilders for his statements in various media about moslims and their belief. The complainants did not agree with the decision of the public prosecution which decided not to give effect to their report against Wilders.


The public prosecution is of the view, amongst others, that part of the statements of Wilders do not relate to a group of worshippers, but consists of criticism as regards the Islamic belief, as a result of which neither the self-esteem of this group of worshippers is affected nor is this group brought into discredit. Some statements of Wilders can be regarded as offending, but since these were made (outside the Dutch Second Chamber) as a contribution to a social debate there is no longer a ground for punishableness of those statements according to the public prosecution.


The Court of Appeal does not agree with this view of the public prosecution and the considerations which form the basis of this view.


The Court of Appeal has considered that the contested views of Wilders (also as shown in his movie Fitna) constitute a criminal offence according to Dutch law as seen in connection with each other, both because of their contents and the method of presentation. This method of presentation is characterized by biased, strongly generalizing phrasings with a radical meaning, ongoing reiteration and an increasing intensity, as a result of which hate is created. According to the Court of Appeal most statements are insulting as well since these statements substantially harm the religious esteem of the Islamic worshippers. According to the Court of Appeal Wilders has indeed insulted the Islamic worshippers themselves by affecting the symbols of the Islamic belief as well.


Secondly, the Court of Appeal has answered the question whether a possible criminal prosecution or conviction would be admissible according to the norms of the European Convention on Human Rights and the jurisprudence of the European Court based thereon, which considers the freedom of expression of paramount importance. The Court of Appeal has concluded that the initiation of a criminal prosecution and a possible conviction later on as well, provided that it is proportionate, does not necessarily conflict with the freedom of expression of Wilders, since statements which create hate and grief made by politicians, taken their special responsibility into consideration, are not permitted according to European standards either.


Thirdly, the Court of Appeal has answered the question whether criminal prosecution of Wilders because of his statements would be opportune in the Dutch situation (the question of opportunity). According to the Court of Appeal the instigation of hatred in a democratic society constitutes such a serious matter that a general interest is at stake in order to draw a clear boundary in the public debate.

836 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:42:43pm

re: #828 Sharmuta

Reduced to ad hominem, huh?

And in such a juvenile manner....

837 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:42:46pm

re: #827 jwb7605

Thank you for not calling me a 5th grader.

838 DeafDog  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:42:53pm

re: #777 Charles

We also have some extremist Christian groups in this country who openly advocate for the overthrow of the Constitution, and the establishment of a theocracy. Some of them are very influential in government -- check out the Christian Reconstructionist movement if you don't believe me. Do you want to prosecute and imprison them too?

Good point.

May I add, that, ironically, it's the extremist athiests who actually scare me the most.

839 zombie  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:42:55pm

re: #767 Pastorius

736 Kilgore Trout,
So what do you think ought to be done about Islamism? Should we just wait, like the Dutch politician said, until Muslims have enough people to vote Sharia into law?

Or perhaps, we ought to wait until they have enough to amend the Constitution? Is that it?

If you have any ideas, I'd like to hear them.

There is no easy answer. There is no single swift stroke that will solve the problem in an instant. The only answer is to endlessly strive to "fight the good fight," which would mean take extremely labor-intensive steps that will only have marginal success over the course of decades. To wit:

a. Each person to the best of his or her ability try to educate as many people as possible to what Islam is really like. Not to distort or slander Islam (which isn't even necessary), nor to whitewash it Karen Armstrong-style, but just reveal the truth about it. And I suspect that the vast majority of Americans would recoil in horror from a totalitarian philosophy.

b. Oppose any outbreaks of shari'a individually, as they occur, whether it be discimination against blind people and dogs by Muslim taxi drivers, or imams demanding special treatment on airplanes, or shari'a courts discriminationg again women, or employees demanding special priveleges to pray or wear hijabs, or whatever.

c. Encourage our government to decrease immigration from Islamic nations.

d. Etc. etc.

I know there is a strong temptation to just "ban" this or this and "solve the problem" with one swift gesture, but by doing so, we undermine our national principles.

840 infidel4ever  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:42:58pm

As regards the insult of a group the Court of Appeal makes a distinction. In general the Court determines that the traditional Dutch culture of debating is based on tolerance of each others views to a large extent while Islamic immigrants may be expected to have consideration for the existing sentiments in the Netherlands as regards their belief, which is partly at odds with Dutch and European values and norms. As regards insulting statements the Court of Appeal prefers the political, public and other legal counter forces rather than the criminal law, as a result of which an active participation to the public debate, by moslims as well, is promoted.


However, the Court of Appeal makes an exception as regards insulting statements in which a connection with Nazism is made (for instance by comparing the Koran with “Mein Kampf”). The Court of Appeal considers this insulting to such a degree for a community of Islamic worshippers that a general interest is deemed to be present in order to prosecute Wilders because of this.


The Court of Appeal concludes that the way in which the public debate about controversial issues is held, such as the immigration and integration debate, does not fall within the ambit of the law in principle indeed, but the situation changes when fundamental boundaries are exceeded. Then criminal law does appear as well.


Otherwise, the Court of Appeal emphasizes that this is a provisional judgment in the sense that Wilders has not been convicted in this suit of complaint. The Court of Appeal has only judged whether there are sufficient indications – at the level of a reasonable suspicion – to start a criminal prosecution against Wilders. The penal judge who will ultimately render judgment in a public criminal trial will answer the question if there is ground for conviction, and if so, to which extent.


LJ Nummer
BH0496


Bron: Gerechtshof Amsterdam
Datum actualiteit: 21 januari 2009

841 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:43:35pm

re: #802 Killgore Trout

If the Neo-nazis were coming to power by legal means (winning an election) I'm not sure imposing legal means to shut them down (ban them, jail the candidates, etc) would do any good.

You're answering my hypothetical by ignoring part of it (point # 2)... no fair.

842 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:43:37pm
843 2by2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:43:47pm

re: #806 maddogg

You can dress a rat in a tuxedo, but he's still just a rat.

come on, he is the only dictator I know, who really knows how to wear a cool headdressYour text to link...

844 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:43:50pm

re: #837 Sharmuta

Thank you for not calling me a 5th grader.

I only do that to my granddaughter when she's being stupid. It gets to her big time, because she's in the 8th grade.

You?
/

845 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:44:01pm

re: #801 faraway

Oh good lord, are you a 5th grader?

You might need to bone up so you can elevate your education to that height.

You get a fact thrown at you and you have to throw a tantrum. Who's acting childish now?

846 eschew_obfuscation  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:44:21pm

re: #758 J.S.

If I can just jump in here...I think there's another problem...Sometimes what happens is that you get a community which decides to isolate itself...Remember those religious cults in the U.S. (some off-shoot of Mormons) who practiced polygamy and some were accused of child abuse, etc? There was a report about a wealthy Pakistani in Canada who bought acres and acres of land, and built houses, mosque, etc., and would sell only to Muslims -- creating, essentially, a Muslim-only community...own schools, own mosques, own newspapers, own book-stores, own dress codes, language, customs, etc; its own isolated, insular society, separate from secular, mainstream Canadian society...should this be tolerated? (frankly, I'm divided on this issue...)

I think the take on that in the U.S. has been "yes, it should be tolerated" as long as no U.S. laws are violated (which can be hard to know). U.S. laws were alleged to have been broken in the Texas case you site.

847 jcm  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:44:38pm

Ohhh boy, here we go again.


Barack Obama: Administration willing to talk to Iran 'without preconditions'
Julian Borger, diplomatic editor
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 21 January 2009 18.07 GMT

The new Obama administration is willing to talk to Iran "without preconditions" and will work towards the abolition of nuclear weapons, the White House said today.

The Obama foreign policy agenda that appeared on the White House website said: "Barack Obama supports tough and direct diplomacy with Iran without preconditions," the policy outline said. The Bush administration made direct talks between the US and Iran conditional on Iranian suspension of its uranium enrichment programme. This step breaks that conditionality, as part of a fundamental shift in diplomatic approach. The Obama agenda said the new administration will "talk to our foes and friends" and not set preconditions

[snip]

The other notable shift in US foreign policy announced today was a strategic decision to move towards a "nuclear free world", through bilateral and multilateral disarmament. "Obama and [Vice President Joe] Biden will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons, and pursue it," according to the agenda. It is a long term goal. The US will maintain a "strong deterrent as long as nuclear weapons exist", but begin to take steps on the "long road towards eliminating nuclear weapons".


1) Direct talks with the Mad Mullahs legitimizes the regime and strenghtens their hand domestically. ALL BAD

2) Nuclear weapons are a fact of nature. You can't undo nature and knowledge. Take certain materials, obtain critical mass, KABLOOIE! You ca not put the nuclear genie back in the bottle because it makes you feel good.

848 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:44:39pm

Anyone feel like an open thread would be a nice thing?

hint hint hint

849 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:45:04pm

re: #804 nikis-knight

Woah. Okay, let's compare.
List all the accomplishments and freedoms in America... I'll wait.

Now, list all the accomplishments and freedoms in Muslim-only countries.
There, that didn't take long, did it?

"You shall know them by their fruits".
The Bible

850 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:45:07pm

re: #847 jcm

Oh shit.

851 rawmuse  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:45:19pm

re: #825 ixolite

That's a fake. It's from the "Faces of Death" series or a similiar movie.

The vid I saw was no fake. It has been removed. I checked. Hard to fake a sharpened stick inserted in to the rectum and emerging through the collarbone area. No clothing covered the wounds.

852 Ben Hur  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:45:26pm

SILENCE!

853 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:45:44pm

re: #845 FurryOldGuyJeans

You might need to bone up so you can elevate your education to that height.

You get a fact thrown at you and you have to throw a tantrum. Who's acting childish now?

I'm rubber and you're glue!

854 sattv4u2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:45:53pm

re: #824 NelsFree

Again, Moderates= Infidels. Taqqiya, too.

Only to the hardliners, who my "moderate" freinds and aquantances abhor and ignore

855 Racer X  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:46:12pm

re: #839 zombie

So, you're saying there is an evolutionary process?

856 Spenser (with an S)  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:46:12pm

re: #777 Charles


Some of them are very influential in government -- check out the Christian Reconstructionist movement

I am a card-carrying member of the Christian Right and I hadn't heard of this group until I just looked them up. Weird and troubling and should be looked at more closely but are they really influential in govt.?

857 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:46:12pm

re: #841 Occasional Reader

I believe that Britain is headed this way with its Muslim population.

858 Lee Coller  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:46:21pm

re: #782 Pyrocles

As our local Communist book store has plastered all over its front windows along with pictures of Che, Stalin, Mao, Obama, and derogatory pictures of Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Reagan: "Learn the TRUTH! READ BANNED BOOKS!"

The amazing thing is that they're not afraid to advertise that they sell them.

859 Silhouette  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:46:26pm

re: #803 MJ

Gadhafi says US should seek peace with bin Laden

But why is that any weirder than saying Israel should make peace with Hamas? Same difference.

Say I was in a real forgiving mood and was willing to let past sins slide in order to bring future peace, we still COULD'NT seek peace with OBL because we cannot make a single concession he asks for and still be free/alive.

860 Ben Hur  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:46:27pm

re: #851 rawmuse

The vid I saw was no fake. It has been removed. I checked. Hard to fake a sharpened stick inserted in to the rectum and emerging through the collarbone area. No clothing covered the wounds.


That's how they used to temper steel.

FOrgot who the "they" are, but it's true.

"They" would use prisoners, or enemy captured.

861 2by2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:46:27pm

re: #808 SWPaul

He's lacking a pimp cane.

He has his bodyguard to make up for.

862 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:46:35pm

re: #853 MandyManners

Oh, up your nose with a rubber hose.

863 n in wi  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:46:41pm

re: #754 faraway

Democracies are ruled by majorities. What would happen in the US if Muslims outbred everyone and became the majority? Walter, what's your solution?


Thats why we have a representative republic. Majority rule with minority rights.We pledge allegiance...........to the republic for witch it stands. I may be wrong but I don't believe the word Democracy is in our Constitution.

864 OldLineTexan  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:46:42pm

re: #561 MandyManners

And, we mock them!

Yet you can mock Nazis without being prosecuted for hate speech.

Mock Islam too much...well, we have the Canadian examples.

865 jcm  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:46:49pm

re: #852 Ben Hur

SILENCE!

PHHBBBBTTTTT!

866 DeafDog  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:46:51pm

re: #815 Nevergiveup

Obama is such a di*k

867 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:47:00pm

re: #817 buzzsawmonkey

The queasiness over "the N-word" (a locution I am heartily sick of)

Me, too. It's bizarre, the idea that we cannot utter a word even for the purpose of discussing it.

I also do wonder how, if at all, schools today teach Joseph Conrad's (I'm gonna type it and see what happens) The n***** of the "Narcissus". (One thing I found interesting about that novel is that, despite its inflammatory title, the race of the character in question bears practically no relationship to the plot.)

868 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:47:02pm

re: #856 Spenser (with an S)

Do you have a nice picture on your card, or are they, like yucky mug shots on passports?

/KIDDING

869 Nevergiveup  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:47:02pm

re: #859 Silhouette

Say I was in a real forgiving mood and was willing to let past sins slide in order to bring future peace, we still COULD'NT seek peace with OBL because we cannot make a single concession he asks for and still be free/alive.

Details Details Details.

870 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:47:15pm

re: #847 jcm

Ohhh boy, here we go again.


Barack Obama: Administration willing to talk to Iran 'without preconditions'
Julian Borger, diplomatic editor
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 21 January 2009 18.07 GMT


1) Direct talks with the Mad Mullahs legitimizes the regime and strenghtens their hand domestically. ALL BAD

2) Nuclear weapons are a fact of nature. You can't undo nature and knowledge. Take certain materials, obtain critical mass, KABLOOIE! You ca not put the nuclear genie back in the bottle because it makes you feel good.

To all those who refused to vote for McCain 'cause he wasn't conservative enough: I HOPE YOU'RE FUCKING HAPPY NOW!

871 Taqiyyotomist  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:47:27pm

re: #854 sattv4u2

Only to the hardliners, who my "moderate" freinds and aquantances abhor and ignore

So they say.

872 maddogg  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:47:35pm

re: #843 2by2

come on, he is the only dictator I know, who really knows how to wear a cool headdressYour text to link...

A rat, in a hat...

873 yma o hyd  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:47:40pm

re: #772 2by2

They will not learn.
The modus operandi is different.
Europe has never been a free market place of ideas. They had a lot of them, but ultimately these ideas ended up to be an ax in the hands of those who attended power through them.

That, however is what happens to all political ideas, isn't it?

Liberal Fascism, anyone?
Or - tongue firmly in cheek - are B0's political ideas now not 'an ax in the hands of those who attend power through them'?

And if I may say so - the Enlightenment was a pretty free market of ideas, in spite of the physical restrictions in the times of travelling by horsepower alone ...

874 opnion  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:47:43pm

re: #835 infidel4ever

Thank you. As I read it thae, it is not just the film that got Wilderes in trouble, "various media"

875 nikis-knight  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:47:44pm

re: #810 Sharmuta

Do you know what is required to amend the Constitution? A super majority in BOTH houses of Congress and another super majority of the states. It's not going to happen.

Well, that or five robes.

But that's only if you have at least some support elsewhere as well. Sharia via Supreme Court decisions isn't really a possibility, even if it is used to amend the constitution in other smaller ways.

876 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:47:44pm

re: #867 Occasional Reader

You can, you just have to RAP it and be black. Then its cool.

877 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:47:50pm

re: #848 WriterMom

Anyone feel like an open thread would be a nice thing?

hint hint hint

Maybe. I'm busy trying to suck Sharmuta into behaving like an 8th grader. Don't let on ...

878 wrenchwench  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:47:50pm

re: #847 jcm

Ohhh boy, here we go again.


Barack Obama: Administration willing to talk to Iran 'without preconditions'

I thought they had to "unclench their fists"?

879 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:48:07pm

re: #862 WriterMom

Oh, up your nose with a rubber hose.

*atomic wedgie*

880 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:48:13pm

re: #767 Pastorius

736 Kilgore Trout,
So what do you think ought to be done about Islamism? Should we just wait, like the Dutch politician said, until Muslims have enough people to vote Sharia into law?

Or perhaps, we ought to wait until they have enough to amend the Constitution? Is that it?

If you have any ideas, I'd like to hear them.

Lets take the Netherlands as an example....

Roman Catholic 30%, Dutch Reformed 11%, Calvinist 6%, other Protestant 3%, Muslim 5.8%, other 2.2%, none 42%

Muslims only comprise 6% of the population. In America it's only about 1%. They are hardly a political force that will sweep elections and install Sharia as state law.
My solution: To continue unchecked immigration from Islamic countries is insanity. Another important factor is to remove these insane hate speech laws and extra-judicial courts like the Canadian human rights commission. They are a huge part of the problem because the Islamists use these courts to prosecute blasphemy cases. If Muslims were treated like everyone else they'd learn pretty quickly to appreciate values like free speech and personal liberty. Those who can't adjust to Western concepts of freedom would become unhappy and leave voluntarily and go back to a safe Muslim country with blasphemy laws.

881 rawmuse  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:48:18pm

re: #857 WriterMom

I believe that Britain is headed this way with its Muslim population.

Britain is the perfect petri dish at the moment. Those arguing one way or the other need only look at the evolving situation de facto.

882 unrealizedviewpoint  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:48:22pm

re: #852 Ben Hur

SILENCE!

Silence!

883 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:48:46pm

re: #860 Ben Hur

That's how they used to temper steel.

FOrgot who the "they" are, but it's true.

"They" would use prisoners, or enemy captured.

Them!

884 vagabond trader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:48:55pm

re: #815 Nevergiveup

Know why he skipped it? Because these heroes actually killed enemies of the USA, and that may offend someone.

885 Ben Hur  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:49:13pm

re: #857 WriterMom

I believe that Britain is headed this way with its Muslim population.

2030. Then we take over.

Google that beyatch!

886 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:49:17pm

re: #880 Killgore Trout

Basically-you are suggesting containment.

887 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:49:20pm

re: #814 Occasional Reader

Of course, by that point, those citizens would be outnumbered, wouldn't they?

But better armed? I don't know. Now, are we going to go China's route and ban births?

It's evident that we are going to have to use all legal channels available to us, with in the United States, to curtail any radical activity.

At the same time, we need to educate the general public to the truth about Islam. Not in the sense of stirring up hatred toward Islam, but laying out the fact clearly.

We need to work with Muslim leaders, the ones who show an interest in respecting the laws of our country, and at the same time, publicly debate the radical represenatives of the religion.

888 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:50:10pm

re: #839 zombie

Well said.

889 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:50:13pm

re: #881 rawmuse

Britain is the perfect petri dish at the moment. Those arguing one way or the other need only look at the evolving situation de facto.

I had Britain on my mind when I wrote that post about having the votes.
I take heart in reading lately that "the votes" are getting sick of allowing Sharia law, etc.

890 faraway  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:50:21pm

re: #837 Sharmuta

Thank you for not calling me a 5th grader.

lol

891 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:50:25pm

re: #880 Killgore Trout

Muslims only comprise 6% of the population. In America it's only about 1%. They are hardly a political force that will sweep elections and install Sharia as state law.
My solution: To continue unchecked immigration from Islamic countries is insanity. Another important factor is to remove these insane hate speech laws and extra-judicial courts like the Canadian human rights commission. They are a huge part of the problem because the Islamists use these courts to prosecute blasphemy cases. If Muslims were treated like everyone else they'd learn pretty quickly to appreciate values like free speech and personal liberty. Those who can't adjust to Western concepts of freedom would become unhappy and leave voluntarily and go back to a safe Muslim country with blasphemy laws.

They also need to stop the cradle-to-grave welfare bennies. Socialism will be the death of Europe yet if it is not stopped.

892 lawhawk  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:50:31pm

re: #832 Occasional Reader

He's right that the tone of the new series is downright bitter and dour, but the original wasn't exactly high art as you note. Thing is, he is right that the new series is far darker than the original and I don't know if that's a good thing. It's just different. I take both for what they are - sci fi... the original was a wee bit more escapist than the new series (okay hugely more escapist) while the new series tries to be more serious and repeatedly attempts to run with themes that when distilled are that the US is bad.

Both series have their good and bad points. Maybe Dirk would have been happier had he been asked to guest on the show... who knows.

893 Ben Hur  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:50:39pm

re: #862 WriterMom

Oh, up your nose with a rubber hose.

My Gran, z"l, used to yell that at drivers when I was in the car!

894 MJ  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:50:43pm

re: #859 Silhouette

Say I was in a real forgiving mood and was willing to let past sins slide in order to bring future peace, we still COULD'NT seek peace with OBL because we cannot make a single concession he asks for and still be free/alive.

Yup, that's the point. Neither could Israel satisfy what Hamas wants and yet the media keeps promoting the myth that Hamas' demands can be negotiated down. The only thing that would satisfy Hamas is the destruction of Israel. The only thing that will satisfy OBL is the destruction of Western Civilization and it's replacement by the Caliphate.

895 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:51:06pm

re: #881 rawmuse

Britain is the perfect petri dish at the moment.

That's one way to describe it. I would say it's more like the home of the Magna Carta, Churhill and Thatcher in a death dance with an immigrant population that openly admits it wants to crush the British way of life and replace it with sharia, or "hell".

896 sattv4u2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:51:08pm

re: #871 Taqiyyotomist

So they say.

Well ,,, while they sleep, I break into their houses and look in every cannister, every box and bag to find gun powder and anthrax and sticks of dynamite and pictures of Osama but so far ,, nada

They are crafty!

oh ,,, by the way ,,,ASSHAT
,, sorry ,, did that slip !?!?!?

897 Silhouette  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:51:22pm

re: #864 OldLineTexan

Mock Islam too much...well, we have the Canadian examples.

And the subject of this thread.

898 Spenser (with an S)  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:51:28pm

re: #868 WriterMom

re: #856 Spenser (with an S)

Do you have a nice picture on your card, or are they, like yucky mug shots on passports?

/KIDDING

Just me and the wife posing with frowns and pitchforks with the kids barefoot in the yard.

899 n in wi  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:51:34pm

re: #811 DeafDog

This raises an interesting question, IMO, but in terms of economics, not religion.

Currently some 35% of the population gets government support. We are headed down the path, if you can believe Obama's rhetoric, where 60% or so will be on government support.

As the constitution protects religious beliefs, but does not protect economic beliefs, and as the Declaration of Independence is lost as a 'founding' document, maybe - just maybe - it's more likely that Capitalism will be banned before any religion.


It's not being enforced, but we are supposed to have private property rights. I believe your money is your private property.

900 formercorpsman  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:51:35pm

re: #780 Walter L. Newton

Walter, I have been trying to follow most of the conversation here in between work.

My argument is the same as most everyone here, banning will not work, it is not right.

Referencing your example of people taking to the streets, IMHO, this should have happened already with respect to how some communities have been allowed to usurp Constitutional law, and decide upon mob rule.

In Philadelphia, as in other places around the world like France, Britain, there is the deliberate infiltration of muslims seeking to defy the common law of the land. They purposely infiltrate an area, instituting a defacto-sharia construct, and essentially dare any authority to challenge it.

I know what the answer is. It is to enforce the law of the land, and abide by the Constitution.

I think some people here are truly frightened by the prospect of what could be. Look at the protests around the world because of Israel recently. Hell, they ran the British police off in a panic, forced someone to take down a flag in their own window, etc.

I think the cat is out of the bag, in many vulnerable places throughout the world.

Just because people have grave concern, and do not feel the ideal will protect them in the end, does not automatically equate with wanting a final solution. I know that is not my position.

To see some of what is going down in our world is a nightmare. I have 3 small children. I fear for their future.

901 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:51:41pm

re: #860 Ben Hur

That's how they used to temper steel.

FOrgot who the "they" are, but it's true.

"They" would use prisoners, or enemy captured.

IIRC from my history researches tempering steel in that manner was done by both the Japanese and Crusade-era Jihadists.

902 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:51:42pm
903 albusteve  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:51:43pm

re: #837 Sharmuta

Thank you for not calling me a 5th grader.

you're at LEAST a 6th grader!.....pffft

904 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:51:52pm

re: #893 Ben Hur

Really? My Zaidy z"l used to fart in the car and blame my brother.

905 Achilles Tang  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:51:55pm

re: #744 Walter L. Newton

Moot argument. Back to that old "they're not really Muslim, they're not really Christian etc."

It's not moot because this is a real fundamental difference between Christianity and Islam. Christian Biblical literalist fundies are a minority. Literalist Muslims are 99+% of them.


Well, look if we kept saying that, oh lets' say, in the middle ages. Those reformation guys, they're not really Christians, let's ban them (which was what happened at times).

The difference is that there is a difference in Christianity between then and now. There is not in Islam.

If the "banning" worked, well, what would the world be like today? No, I'll keep support the Muslims who want to see reform, whether some of they're religion sees them as apostates or not.

I didn't disagree with that, but it will lead nowhere. 99% of their religion will see them as apostate. There is no solution that involves debate that does not simultaneously require a split in Islam and a deletion of half the Koran, and how can anyone who calls themselves Muslim advocate deleting the word of God? If they are able to be selective in that regard, how can they claim that what remains is the word of God, and why would it then be worth worshiping? It is a lot easier to convert a creationist to evolution than a Muslim to.....what?

Or what is your final solution?

There is no solution. We will always be at war with fundamentalism. We can barely keep our own education system from succumbing to our own examples of it. The one saving grace, long term, is that Islam will never improve the lot of their own people. One day the oil will run out and they will have to learn to herd goats again. When they misbehave they will have to be dealt with. That's life.

906 eschew_obfuscation  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:52:29pm

re: #856 Spenser (with an S)

I am a card-carrying member of the Christian Right and I hadn't heard of this group until I just looked them up. Weird and troubling and should be looked at more closely but are they really influential in govt.?

They must be better at keeping secrets than the Masons ;~)

907 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:52:31pm

re: #862 WriterMom

Oh, up your nose with a rubber hose.

Actual lyrics we made up in 5th grade, when we were learning about the history of slavery and what was once called "Negro spiritual" music (don't know the PC term for it):

Go down, Moses
Wayyy dowwwn in Egypt la-aand
Tell old
Pharoah...
UP YOUR NOSE WITH A RUBBER HOSE!
TWICE AS FAR WITH A CHOCOLATE BAR!

908 Ben Hur  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:52:41pm

re: #883 Occasional Reader

Them!

Not what I expected.

I know, I know.

Nobody expects the Inquisition.

909 midwestgak  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:53:08pm

This is only the beginning of Sharia law expansion

The whole article is quite long, but very informative. Written in August of 2005.

One of the most tragic and under—reported occurrences in the West in recent years is the existence of a sharia court in Canada. Muslims are pushing for a sharia divorce courting Australia as well. Having a court of arbitration if it is based on western law and legal theory is legitimate, but sharia does not hold to this standard. Whether sharia is imposed gradually or rapidly, Canada should promptly shut down any sharia court, and Australia should never allow one. Such a court should never be permitted in the US, the rest of the West, or anywhere else in the world that is battling Islam.

910 Racer X  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:53:12pm

re: #870 MandyManners

To all those who refused to vote for McCain 'cause he wasn't conservative enough: I HOPE YOU'RE FUCKING HAPPY NOW!

There's been some McCain bashing here again today. I've been through a few elections and it seems to me it always boils down to voting for the smartest idiot. Holding out for the perfect candidate is a wasted exercise.

911 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:53:27pm

re: #853 MandyManners

I'm rubber and you're glue!

I'm hoping beyond hope that was not directed towards my comment, Mandy. ;)

912 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:53:32pm

re: #900 formercorpsman

In Philadelphia, as in other places around the world like France, Britain, there is the deliberate infiltration of muslims seeking to defy the common law of the land. They purposely infiltrate an area, instituting a defacto-sharia construct, and essentially dare any authority to challenge it.

Don't they know what happened to MOVE?

913 nikis-knight  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:53:38pm

re: #849 NelsFree

Woah. Okay, let's compare.
List all the accomplishments and freedoms in America... I'll wait.

Now, list all the accomplishments and freedoms in Muslim-only countries.
There, that didn't take long, did it?

"You shall know them by their fruits".
The Bible


How exactly is that connected with what I said? Which was, in other words, Islam is more than religion, which is the problem. Hopefully Muslims will truncate the oppressive political system attached to it, but that's not looking immanent.

914 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:53:40pm

re: #875 nikis-knight

No- the SCOTUS could not amend the Constitution from the bench, only interpret the law in such a way that could give shari'a a foot in the door, but I likewise don't see that happening. Shari'a discriminates against women, and that would be a violation of the 14th amendment.

915 wrenchwench  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:53:43pm

re: #900 formercorpsman

I know what the answer is. It is to enforce the law of the land, and abide by the Constitution.

...and there we have it. I think this wins the thread.

916 Lincolntf  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:53:57pm

re: #870 MandyManners

Iran wins a thirty-year battle without firing a shot. This is the "new" definition of a succesful Defense Policy.

917 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:53:58pm

re: #841 Occasional Reader

I did address that. Smashing their printing presses, shutting down their servers, jailing their candidates or banning them from elections does not solve the problem to I wouldn't advocate legal means to do these things. It simply doesn't solve the problem which would be widespread popular support. That would be the real problem.

918 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:54:17pm

re: #891 MandyManners

Agreed.

919 MandyManners  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:54:26pm

Gotta' go pick up The Kid. bbl

920 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:54:38pm

re: #910 Racer X

There's been some McCain bashing here again today. I've been through a few elections and it seems to me it always boils down to voting for the smartest idiot. Holding out for the perfect candidate is a wasted exercise.

Tough choice, this election.

921 Sharmuta  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:54:45pm

re: #890 faraway

Jerk.

922 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:54:48pm

re: #878 wrenchwench

I thought they had to "unclench their fists"?

Well, the talks will be "tough and direct", so I guess that means, er, well, nothing, actually, it's empty bloviating, and I'm already sick to fucking death of it.

923 Taqiyyotomist  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:55:18pm

re: #896 sattv4u2

Well ,,, while they sleep, I break into their houses and look in every cannister, every box and bag to find gun powder and anthrax and sticks of dynamite and pictures of Osama but so far ,, nada

They are crafty!

oh ,,, by the way ,,,ASSHAT
,, sorry ,, did that slip !?!?!?

I'm an asshat for not trusting people who say they follow the Koran and Hadith? If so, I'll wear that badge. Because I don't. You've been here a while. You know about this thing called taqiyya? It's a real Muslim doctrine. Acknowledging that fact is not paranoia.

924 2by2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:55:32pm

re: #873 yma o hyd

That, however is what happens to all political ideas, isn't it?

Liberal Fascism, anyone?
Or - tongue firmly in cheek - are B0's political ideas now not 'an ax in the hands of those who attend power through them'?

And if I may say so - the Enlightenment was a pretty free market of ideas, in spite of the physical restrictions in the times of travelling by horsepower alone ...

You've got a point, though really BO's ax isn't as sharp as any of the continental Europeans axes.
..and no I don't think Enlightenment was a free market of ideas, ultimately it was about the loss of power of the church and nothing else. The ideas had been around for some 2 thousand years before, and yes ultimately in the french revolution they ended up to be a bloody ax, quite literally.
No offense, but GB really isn't Europe, to me the Isles are the first attempt to remake European tribal crap into something better, with limited success.

925 opnion  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:55:45pm

re: #780 Walter L. Newton

I don't care. We still have a Constitution and a Bill of Rights. Are you are suggesting that those two documents would become obsolete. If we had a majority of Muslims in this country, as long as the country is still being run by those two documents, no problem.

If Muslims tried to change those documents, or make them moot, than I think you would find a legal right of citizens to take to the streets, to protect the country of that sort of take over.

But, unless that is happening, then we still have those documents and we follow the rule of law.

And what would you like to do?


Walter , if I could jump in. Let's look at this hypothetical, if there was a majority of dedicated Islamists (not just Muslims) & an Islamic POTUS ,
do you really think that the Costitution & Bill of Rights would be respected? Would street demonstrations opposing the government be tolerated? Past history & current events suggest no & no.
I am not saying ban the book & round em up, I am just addressing the hypothetical.

926 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:55:46pm

re: #860 Ben Hur

I believe the practise to which you refer (tempering a sword blade by running it through an about-to-die person) was done by the japanese, in making their Samurai swords. It was said the soul of the deceased inhabited the blade. Another reason why Japanese collectors will pay top dollar for swords captured during WW2.

927 Archimedes  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:55:49pm

I agree with you, Charles, on both points. It's wrong what they are doing to Geert Wilders and it is wrong that Wilders wants to ban the Koran.

This is akin to what happened to Mark Steyn in Canada.

Postmodernism is out of control! Scary stuff.

928 jcm  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:56:03pm

So much for steering for the center....

Obama to ask generals for 16-month Iraq withdrawal plan
4 hours ago

President Barack Obama will meet top military brass on Wednesday in a bid to follow through on his key campaign pledge to order US troops home from Iraq within 16 months, aides said.

In his first full day in office, Obama will meet Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen and the top US commander in southwest Asia, General David Petraeus.


Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
If this President squanders the achievement of our military it will be unforgivable.

929 Pietr  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:56:14pm

re: #840 infidel4ever

Thank you for the informed input-but has anyone Challenged the Hate speech/Kill infidels that is in the Koran/Quran/however one wants to spell it? The Bible had a lot of 'death and destruction' in it, but christians don't stone gays/or consider women property. Maybe some of those Euro-courts should be challenged on who is actually HATE SPEAKING-and which book has peeps actually acting on the words....just IMHO!

930 Racer X  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:56:28pm

re: #920 jwb7605

Tough choice, this election.

Not tough at all, for me.

One person was qualified and the other was not.

931 JHW  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:56:35pm

Is it not true for a Muslim that the only authorized Koran is the Arabic one, to be more specific I'm guessing the great majority of Muslims worldwide have only a second hand knowledge of it, it's written in an alien language which they memorize by rote. I'm not sure myself where I'm going with this, but it appears to me the Mullahs and the Imans are the troublemakers and also the choke-point of the religion. The 5 Pillars credo, Eid, Ramadan, pilgrimage and the like wouldn't trouble the rest of the world, but the rabble-rousers, like the Wahabis, interpreting and preaching the worst parts of the Koran are what we have to get a handle on somehow. I have no idea how to do this.

932 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:56:38pm

re: #900 formercorpsman

I am the first to say that it's going to be a rocky road, and it isn't going to be pretty. But giving up some of our freedoms in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, just to bring a quick solution to what is a possible problem, is not, IMHO the direction we should go.

There are legal ways to shut down the radicals.

933 wrenchwench  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:56:43pm

re: #922 Occasional Reader

Well, the talks will be "tough and direct", so I guess that means, er, well, nothing, actually, it's empty bloviating, and I'm already sick to fucking death of it.

Day One.

{OR}

934 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:56:47pm

re: #920 jwb7605

Tough choice, this election.

REAL tough. Lesser of Two Evils for me really was a good descriptor.

935 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:57:31pm

re: #892 lawhawk

Thing is, he is right that the new series is far darker than the original and I don't know if that's a good thing. It's just different. I take both for what they are - sci fi...

The first two seasons, at least, of the new series were ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE better than the original. Acting, writing, cinematography, you name it. And it had a strong post-9/11 vibe, of survival and fighting back against those seeking one's annihilation. And then... in the 3rd season, they jumped the Cylon Shark.

936 Achilles Tang  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:57:40pm

re: #780 Walter L. Newton

I don't care. We still have a Constitution and a Bill of Rights. Are you are suggesting that those two documents would become obsolete. If we had a majority of Muslims in this country, as long as the country is still being run by those two documents, no problem.

If Muslims tried to change those documents, or make them moot, than I think you would find a legal right of citizens to take to the streets, to protect the country of that sort of take over.

But, unless that is happening, then we still have those documents and we follow the rule of law.

And what would you like to do?

Constitutions can be amended, legally. At what point of amendment, via democracy, would you advocate taking to the streets? Do you advocate taking to the streets now that Obama has won?

State constitutions have been amended to discriminate against gays. Once the principle of discrimination and special rights in constitutions becomes common enough, then sky is the limit.

937 nikis-knight  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:57:49pm

re: #905 Naso Tang

It's not moot because this is a real fundamental difference between Christianity and Islam. Christian Biblical literalist fundies are a minority. Literalist Muslims are 99+% of them.

Actually, that's not the difference. The difference is what those fundamentals ARE, and that strict Muslims create societies of repression and stagnation, while strict christians created, well, America.

938 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:57:51pm

re: #909 midwestgak

939 LGoPs  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:58:15pm

re: #778 lawhawk

Khadafi says that the US should make peace with bin Laden. Or is that Quadafi. Or Gadafi. Whatever.

He's thinking that the US will just roll over and suck up to terrorists and dictators.

It can be any of the above as Arabic is transliterated into English. When I lived in the ME I saw numerous different spellings for city names on roadsigns....none of them being more correct than the others.......

940 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:58:17pm

re: #886 WriterMom

I think I'm suggesting assimilation more than containment. I think coddling Islamist sensitivities prevents them from accepting Western values. I think it would happen pretty quickly (maybe 10 years or so). You could then resume less restricted immigration from Islamic countries again once there's a native Westernized Islamic community to help the new immigrants assimilate. As Mandy pointed out ending the European welfare state is also very important.

941 midwestgak  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:58:19pm

re: #928 jcm

So much for steering for the center....

Obama to ask generals for 16-month Iraq withdrawal plan
4 hours ago


Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
If this President squanders the achievement of our military it will be unforgivable.

I'm of the opinion that Obama Is simply puppeting the timeline left for him to follow that Bush had already arranged with the military.

942 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:58:36pm

re: #917 Killgore Trout


I did address that. Smashing their printing presses, shutting down their servers, jailing their candidates or banning them from elections does not solve the problem

Part of my stated hypothetical condition was that it WOULD solve the problem. See, that's the part you're not addressing.

943 bulwrk  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:58:58pm

re: #926 NelsFree

As part of the samurai sword making process a sword tester took the new blade and cut through the bodies of corpses or condemned criminals. They started by cutting through the small bones of the body and moved up to the large bones. Test results were often recorded on the nakago (the metal piece attaching the sword blade to the handle).

944 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:58:58pm

re: #930 Racer X

Not tough at all, for me.

One person was qualified and the other was not.

The way I voted, the idiot was qualified and the smart* guy was not.
I voted for the idiot.

Lost.
*smart = crafty/dishonest/popular

945 sattv4u2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:59:04pm

re: #923 Taqiyyotomist

I'm an asshat for not trusting people who say they follow the Koran and Hadith? If so, I'll wear that badge. Because I don't. You've been here a while. You know about this thing called taqiyya? It's a real Muslim doctrine. Acknowledging that fact is not paranoia.

No. I called you an ASSHAT for proporting to know MY freinds hearts and thoughts better than I do. I call you an ASSHAT for painting ALL Muslims with one brush. It would be akin to caloling EVERY preist a child molester, EVERY bank exec a crook, EVERY African American kid a "thug"!

I suggest you widen your circle of aquantances!

946 Boolz  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:59:07pm

A Constitutional question mixed with a little Zen: if an unconstitutional law is passed by a legislature yet is neither enforced nor challenged, is it still unconstitutional?

947 Kosh's Shadow  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:59:32pm

re: #910 Racer X

There's been some McCain bashing here again today. I've been through a few elections and it seems to me it always boils down to voting for the smartest idiot. Holding out for the perfect candidate is a wasted exercise.

I just wish I had voted for a candidate that actually wanted to win. I'm not so sure he did, now.

948 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:59:35pm

re: #925 opnion

Walter , if I could jump in. Let's look at this hypothetical, if there was a majority of dedicated Islamists (not just Muslims) & an Islamic POTUS ,
do you really think that the Costitution & Bill of Rights would be respected? Would street demonstrations opposing the government be tolerated? Past history & current events suggest no & no.
I am not saying ban the book & round em up, I am just addressing the hypothetical.

You don't understand our Republic. A majority does not make something "law."

949 eschew_obfuscation  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:59:35pm

re: #922 Occasional Reader

Well, the talks will be "tough and direct", so I guess that means, er, well, nothing, actually, it's empty bloviating, and I'm already sick to fucking death of it.

Have you been attending Mandy's school of unvarnished, direct speech?

950 Honorary Yooper  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 12:59:58pm

re: #934 FurryOldGuyJeans

REAL tough. Lesser of Two Evils for me really was a good descriptor.

That's why Cuthulu needed to be on the ballot. Why vote for the lesser evil?

951 Kosh's Shadow  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:00:11pm

re: #926 NelsFree

I believe the practise to which you refer (tempering a sword blade by running it through an about-to-die person) was done by the japanese, in making their Samurai swords. It was said the soul of the deceased inhabited the blade. Another reason why Japanese collectors will pay top dollar for swords captured during WW2.

It was used by the Arabs to make Damascus steel blades.
(The actual steel came from India.)

952 midwestgak  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:00:13pm

re: #848 WriterMom

Anyone feel like an open thread would be a nice thing?

hint hint hint

Yes PLEASE. I have some venting to do OT.

953 Archimedes  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:00:15pm

re: #780 Walter L. Newton

I don't care. We still have a Constitution and a Bill of Rights. Are you are suggesting that those two documents would become obsolete. If we had a majority of Muslims in this country, as long as the country is still being run by those two documents, no problem.

If Muslims tried to change those documents, or make them moot, than I think you would find a legal right of citizens to take to the streets, to protect the country of that sort of take over.

But, unless that is happening, then we still have those documents and we follow the rule of law.

And what would you like to do?

The way I see it, the Constitution is a protection for our rights, but it is not an absolute protection against complete societal decay. If we get complete societal decay it will be our intellectuals who have failed us and it will be over for us all.

I'm hoping we don't get to that point!

954 yma o hyd  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:00:30pm

re: #881 rawmuse

Britain is the perfect petri dish at the moment. Those arguing one way or the other need only look at the evolving situation de facto.

But do please not forget to look at the role the British Government has played in this - for over ten years.
And please take a good look at the neostalinist NuLab policies - and start wondering how much of that might be coming your way, thanks to the new President, inaugurated yesterday ...

955 jcm  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:00:41pm

re: #847 jcm

re: #928 jcm

On his first day in office Obama is reverting to his first position on these matters. Positions that moderated after the criticism.

This reversion to his first statements does not bode well.

Remain in your seats, the seat belt sign is on, turbulence ahead.

956 godfrey  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:00:45pm
A year earlier, Mr Wilders described the Koran as a "fascist book" and called for it to be banned in "the same way we ban Mein Kampf", in a letter published in the De Volkskrant newspaper.

Do they really ban Mein Kampf?

957 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:00:53pm
958 DeafDog  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:00:54pm

re: #899 n in wi

It's not being enforced, but we are supposed to have private property rights. I believe your money is your private property.

The courts have already greatly expanded the scope of eminent domain.

Remember the buzz about the govt. taking over all the 401k accounts in the last election?

I'm not saying it's going to happen tommorrow, but it does seem like we are witnessing a dangerous reversal from America's early days.

959 LGoPs  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:01:00pm

re: #902 Iron Fist

Sometimes it is hard to support the Republicans. They often act like they want to be the permanent minority party. And they are none too keen on standing up for their own, or standing together as a block. Those are two things that the Democrats have down cold. You can rape or murder a woman, and if you are a Democrat your Party will stand behind you.


Hell, you might even get nominated to run for and become President.......
/

960 Dandy_Don  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:01:05pm

I think that you have to remember that the Netherlands is a different country to the US - they already ban Hitler's Mein Kampf. Therefore, following that logic, then I can understand the comments of Wilder.

961 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:01:12pm

re: #946 Boolz

A Constitutional question mixed with a little Zen: if an unconstitutional law is passed by a legislature yet is neither enforced nor challenged, is it still unconstitutional?

I think the answer is yes (unconstitutional), but enforceable.
Supreme Court has reinforced my opinion on a couple of occasions.

962 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:01:15pm

re: #949 eschew_obfuscation

Have you been attending Mandy's school of unvarnished, direct speech?

The MandyManners Finishing School for Young Ladies and Gentlemen... yes.

963 Taqiyyotomist  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:01:24pm

re: #900 formercorpsman

re: #905 Naso Tang

Thank you. Others, as always, articluate my views far more kindly, more accurately, and more rationally than I. As always.

Not everyone who thinks Islam is evil and un-reformable also believes that a "final solution" should be applied, contrary to popular belief.

964 Silhouette  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:01:36pm

re: #928 jcm

Key campaign promise? I never heard him mention the 16 month timeline. Just withdrawl at some unspecificied time, implied at LLL rallies to be Day 1, and implied to security-concerned voters to be "as soon as safely possible."

965 nikis-knight  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:01:51pm

re: #914 Sharmuta

No- the SCOTUS could not amend the Constitution from the bench, only interpret the law in such a way that could give shari'a a foot in the door, but I likewise don't see that happening. Shari'a discriminates against women, and that would be a violation of the 14th amendment.

What matters is the enforcement of the constitution, which is based on the interpretation of it; not the actual words and amendments. In which case, if the Supreme Court made a convincing case that had some measure of support, they could hypothetically amend the constitution to say anything in practice, if not in fact.

But that isn't really relevant here, because it will be a long while before the constitution could be stretched into Sharia. One wonders, though, whether are some point PC'ness will insist that Sharia be one source of "International Law" that is looked at to interpret our own con law.

966 bellamags  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:01:53pm

re: #946 Boolz

A Constitutional question mixed with a little Zen: if an unconstitutional law is passed by a legislature yet is neither enforced nor challenged, is it still unconstitutional?

yes

967 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:01:54pm

re: #953 Archimedes

The way I see it, the Constitution is a protection for our rights, but it is not an absolute protection against complete societal decay. If we get complete societal decay it will be our intellectuals who have failed us and it will be over for us all. I'm hoping we don't get to that point!

If we get to that point, it's every man for himself I guess. If we get to that point, we will be far down the road from just a radical Muslim problem.

968 ThinkRight  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:01:57pm

So far Hussien Obamas first day in office has been undoing everything Bush did to keep us safe.
Day 2 ?

969 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:01:57pm

re: #946 Boolz

A Constitutional question mixed with a little Zen: if an unconstitutional law is passed by a legislature yet is neither enforced nor challenged, is it still unconstitutional?

Yes.

970 Peacekeeper  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:02:09pm

Heh Department

MSNBC front page features this link: Obamas hit inaugural balls

Low brow I know

971 jcm  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:02:25pm

re: #946 Boolz

A Constitutional question mixed with a little Zen: if an unconstitutional law is passed by a legislature yet is neither enforced nor challenged, is it still unconstitutional?

Yes it is, but the unconstitutional law becomes the defacto law.
See the commerce clause, the most abused enumerated power that has allowed for most of the expansion of government.

972 Honorary Yooper  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:02:31pm

re: #962 Occasional Reader

The MandyManners Finishing School for Young Ladies and Gentlemen... yes.

Her school is fucking brilliant and fucking great.

973 Walter L. Newton  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:02:36pm

re: #960 Dandy_Don

I think that you have to remember that the Netherlands is a different country to the US - they already ban Hitler's Mein Kampf. Therefore, following that logic, then I can understand the comments of Wilder.

So can I. It don't make him right.

974 Charles Johnson  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:02:39pm

re: #856 Spenser (with an S)

I am a card-carrying member of the Christian Right and I hadn't heard of this group until I just looked them up. Weird and troubling and should be looked at more closely but are they really influential in govt.?

Yes, they are -- start looking into the politicians who are linked to Dominionism and Reconstructionism, and prepare to be even more troubled.

975 jwb7605  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:02:43pm

re: #953 Archimedes

The way I see it, the Constitution is a protection for our rights, but it is not an absolute protection against complete societal decay. If we get complete societal decay it will be our intellectuals who have failed us and it will be over for us all.

I'm hoping we don't get to that point!

It's not the intellectuals that fail us for social decay. We elected them, read them, or studied under them.

976 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:02:53pm

re: #922 Occasional Reader

Day 1...four more years to go...

977 rawmuse  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:03:10pm

re: #954 yma o hyd

My perception of the entire problem is a little too acute right now. Oh, to be plunged back in to blissful ignorance for just a little while.

978 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:03:19pm

re: #946 Boolz

A Constitutional question mixed with a little Zen: if an unconstitutional law is passed by a legislature yet is neither enforced nor challenged, is it still unconstitutional?

In theory, yes, but if it's completely unenforced, it would be difficult or impossible for any plaintiff to establish "standing" to challenge its constitutionality in a court.

979 godfrey  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:03:35pm

re: #976 WriterMom

That's four years to work on his not being re-elected. Time's a-wastin'.

980 jcm  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:03:39pm

re: #964 Silhouette

Key campaign promise? I never heard him mention the 16 month timeline. Just withdrawl at some unspecificied time, implied at LLL rallies to be Day 1, and implied to security-concerned voters to be "as soon as safely possible."

July 04, 2008

981 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:03:47pm

re: #970 Peacekeeper

Heh Department

MSNBC front page features this link: Obamas hit inaugural balls

Low brow I know

I knew we could count on you, PK!

982 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:03:48pm

re: #942 Occasional Reader

Part of my stated hypothetical condition was that it WOULD solve the problem.


Ah, ok. I guess it would depend on how it would solve the problem. After you shut down their printing press do people no longer vote for them?

I'd still have trouble endorsing limiting free speech to save Democratic rule. I guess I'll have to say to to shutting down a parties free speech because you never know who's going to be next.

983 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:03:49pm

re: #955 jcm

re: #928 jcm

On his first day in office Obama is reverting to his first position on these matters. Positions that moderated after the criticism.

This reversion to his first statements does not bode well.

Remain in your seats, the seat belt sign is on, turbulence ahead.

The fire you see outside on the wing is only an illusion.

984 Boolz  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:04:14pm

re: #934 FurryOldGuyJeans

Maybe McCain should have passed out "We're less evil than they are" bumperstickers and pins

985 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:04:24pm

re: #931 JHW
Perhaps you should get your own Qu'ran as I did and read it through.

986 DeafDog  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:04:29pm

re: #928 jcm

So much for steering for the center....

Obama to ask generals for 16-month Iraq withdrawal plan
4 hours ago


Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
If this President squanders the achievement of our military it will be unforgivable.

Can we at least withdraw from Germany and then South Korea first. Those places are way more stable than Iraq!

987 J.S.  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:04:33pm

re: #846 eschew_obfuscation

I suppose there's something of a tradition (in the States and here in Canada) of allowing religious communities to isolate themselves...and to tolerate it...(yet when one considers Islam? should it be qualitatively different? one could imagine an honor killing occurring, yet suppose no one complains or finds out? acceptable? tolerable? and, at what point would those living in an isolated religious community cease to be "citizens" of the country in which they reside -- for all intents and purposes?)

988 bulwrk  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:05:02pm

re: #947 Kosh's Shadow

I just wish I had voted for a candidate that actually wanted to win. I'm not so sure he did, now.

It seems that at some point late in the campaign he decided he did not want to stand in the way of America electing its first black president and just quit.

989 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:05:09pm

re: #972 Honorary Yooper

Her school is fucking brilliant and fucking great.

I will note, all false modesty aside, that I graduated Summa Cum Fucking Laude.

990 n in wi  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:05:23pm

re: #928 jcm
When doe's the status of forces agreement Bush had with Iraq call for forces to be out?
I thought it was conditionally 18 Months.

991 jcm  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:05:28pm

re: #986 DeafDog

Can we at least withdraw from Germany and then South Korea first. Those places are way more stable than Iraq!

New Orleans is still occupied....
/

992 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:05:35pm
993 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:05:45pm

re: #970 Peacekeeper

{PK}

Don't go changing!

994 DeafDog  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:06:18pm

re: #946 Boolz

A Constitutional question mixed with a little Zen: if an unconstitutional law is passed by a legislature yet is neither enforced nor challenged, is it still unconstitutional?


Yes.

Next Quesion

/ooooohhhhmmmmmm

995 n in wi  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:06:33pm

re: #958 DeafDog

The courts have already greatly expanded the scope of eminent domain.

Remember the buzz about the govt. taking over all the 401k accounts in the last election?

I'm not saying it's going to happen tommorrow, but it does seem like we are witnessing a dangerous reversal from America's early days.

Started with Wilson and FDR

996 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:06:42pm

re: #989 Occasional Reader

HAHHAHAHAHAA

997 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:06:48pm

re: #964 Silhouette

Key campaign promise? I never heard him mention the 16 month timeline. Just withdrawl at some unspecificied time, implied at LLL rallies to be Day 1, and implied to security-concerned voters to be "as soon as safely possible."

He is having to actually make good on campaign promises; voting present or saying it is above his paygrade just don't cut the mustard any more.

998 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:06:49pm

re: #940 Killgore Trout

I think I'm suggesting assimilation more than containment.

Um, no. Muslims consider their religion to be supranational. They won't assimilate, and if you look at just about every European country, they have not assimilated. The Ummah is worldwide.

999 WriterMom  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:06:56pm

HOPENCHANGING THREAD ^ ^ ^ ^

1000 formercorpsman  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:07:09pm

re: #912 MandyManners

Yeah, prime example of my point totally.

There was no need for Mayor Goode to allow that escalation.

The law should have dealt with it early on.

1001 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:07:31pm

re: #982 Killgore Trout

Ah, ok. I guess it would depend on how it would solve the problem. After you shut down their printing press do people no longer vote for them?

Son, you're slipperier than a... thing that's really slippery... in a folsky aphorism involving, um, things noted for their slipperiness.

I certainly am not all hot n' bothered to ban speech and smash printing presses, by any means. But I think under truly extreme circumstances, most of us would look the othe way. "The Constitution is not a suicide pact."

1002 jcm  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:08:01pm

re: #990 n in wi

When doe's the status of forces agreement Bush had with Iraq call for forces to be out?
I thought it was conditionally 18 Months.

Not sure.......

1003 Spenser (with an S)  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:08:02pm

re: #989 Occasional Reader

re: #972 Honorary Yooper

Her school is fucking brilliant and fucking great.

I will note, all false modesty aside, that I graduated Summa Cum Fucking Laude

I have her bumper-sticker; "My Mandy-Manners School Honors Student beat the living shit out of your kid!"

1004 FurryOldGuyJeans  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:08:11pm

re: #984 Boolz

Maybe McCain should have passed out "We're less evil than they are" bumperstickers and pins

The media furor over that even in jest would have been enormous.

1005 bellamags  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:08:14pm

re: #992 Iron Fist

you have such a way with words and giving me bubbleguts.

1006 godfrey  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:08:18pm

re: #931 JHW

It's not "alien," but it's close. A scholar of medieval Islam tells me the difference between modern Arabic and medieval ("classical") Arabic is pretty much the difference between modern English and Middle English (the English of Chaucer). That is, it's very difficult for the average modern reader of Arabic and requires concerted study.

They should read it in English and save themselves the trouble. If it weren't so filled with yuck, it's a snooze in any language.

Sorry if that offends any officious Dutchmen reading this.

1007 JHW  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:08:39pm

re: #985 NelsFree

Why do you say that? What in my post made you think I'm not familiar with the Koran? My post was adressing the fact that most muslims aren't familiar with the Koran by reading (it's in an alien language), they get their knowledge of it second hand. My knowledge or lack of it of the Koran had nothing to do with my post.

1008 unreconstructed rebel  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:08:48pm

Sharia law strikes me as vigilantism run wild. Any self respecting legal system, be it city, state or fed, needs to be willing to quash it.

Should the sharia'ists become the dominant political force and succeed in changing our constitution ... well, I don't think I will live that long.

I take that position not to damn our children, but to understand that we have a responsibility to our children to leave them with a value system strong enough to withstand a value system that brings with it sharia law.

1009 Achilles Tang  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:08:52pm

re: #937 nikis-knight

Actually, that's not the difference. The difference is what those fundamentals ARE, and that strict Muslims create societies of repression and stagnation, while strict christians created, well, America.

Yes we can debate the differences in the holy books and I have no problem recognizing that one has many higher values than the other, which has resulted in different forms of society.

But that is not what I was arguing about. I was simply saying that one has the inherent capacity to change. The other does not.

1010 Occasional Reader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:09:01pm

re: #992 Iron Fist

No, man, he'll abolish nuclear weapons, doncha see. Once that's done, everyone will suddenly forget how to make them, so they'll be un-invented, and we'll have nothign to worry about.

/

1011 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:09:29pm

re: #994 DeafDog

Yes.

Next Quesion

/ooooohhhhmmmmmm

The Supreme Court would have to review it. I don't believe they HAVE to have someone bring a case. It would be unlikely, though, given their usual caseload.
Checks and Balances, Baby!

1012 jcm  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:09:55pm

re: #992 Iron Fist

I've mentioned this before. What Obama appears to be working himself up to is a unilateral nuclear disarmament of the United States, coupled with an end to research and development of anti-ballistic missile defenses. If the Republicans had any balls, they'd ask him publicly why he wants American cities to be nuked, which American cities he wants to see nuked, and what should America do after we've been nuked.

The motherfucker is flirting with treason, and he's only been in office a little over 24 hours. This is going to be a long four years.

That has been a goal of the hard left for a long time.

I hope this line of thinking is very, very wrong.....

Imagine at the mercy of the Mad Mullahs with a handful of nucs.

1013 DeafDog  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:10:08pm

re: #995 n in wi

Started with Wilson and FDR

Yes, but then it seemed to stay dormant in 1950's, got a bump in the 1960s and now seems to be excellerating into a sprint.

1014 Ben Hur  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:10:33pm

re: #901 FurryOldGuyJeans

IIRC from my history researches tempering steel in that manner was done by both the Japanese and Crusade-era Jihadists.

Interesting coincidence, since I like to use Imperial Japan as an analogy for today's war on Islamofascism.

1015 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:11:15pm

re: #1001 Occasional Reader

I get where you're coming from now. It's a very interesting question. I still don't think I'd limit free speech to save democratic rule. You can flip that question too; I wouldn't sacrifice democratic rule to preserve free speech.

1016 jcm  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:11:16pm

re: #990 n in wi

When doe's the status of forces agreement Bush had with Iraq call for forces to be out?
I thought it was conditionally 18 Months.

The difference is the SoF agreement is extendable if the security situtation requires. BHO wants out, period in 16mo.

1017 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:11:20pm
1018 yma o hyd  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:11:45pm

re: #924 2by2

Heh - loss of freedom does not always go hand-in-hand with actual bloodshed.

as for the Enlightenment - agree as far as political ideas are concerned, but these are not the only ideas in the free marketplace. I'm thinking of the rise of the learned scoieties, like the Royal society ehre in GB (Newton was a member) - I'm thinking of mathematics, physics, natural sciences - arts, music, litarature: these all are also 'ideas' which ahve to compete.
And then we have the economical ideas - Smith, Locke - these ideas were indeed freely exchanged.

It is an error to limit 'idea' just to the political sphere, because if we disregard the importance of all those ideas, it will be to our detriment.

In fact - the decrease of political power in the Ummah came because iy closed its borders to un-islamic ideas, just as the west, from the Renaissance onwards, opened its minds ...

1019 godfrey  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:12:01pm

Mandymanners Finishing School 101
Syllabus

Week 1: Sit the f*** down.
Week 2: The Expletive: A Short F***** History, OK?
Week 3: To *WHACK* or Not to *WHACK*: A Whacker's Guide to the Galaxy
Week 4: How to Be F****** Brilliant

1020 Boolz  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:12:44pm

re: #1004 FurryOldGuyJeans

The media furor over that even in jest would have been enormous.

Then how about "Whatever Obama promises, I'll DOUBLE it"?

1021 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:13:09pm

re: #1007 JHW

Muslims are required to learn the Qu'ran (correct spelling) AND to learn Arabic in order to understand it. The ones who don't are, once again, Infidels. SILENCE! Sorry, that slipped out.

1022 opnion  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:13:12pm

re: #948 Walter L. Newton

You don't understand our Republic. A majority does not make something "law."


Walter I think that I do understand our Republic. We of course are not a pure democracy. If that were true there would be a wall on the Southern Border.
I was dealing with a hypothet of people becioming a majority that do not respect our institutions. It was a hypothetical.

1023 Ben Hur  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:13:45pm

re: #928 jcm

So much for steering for the center....

Obama to ask generals for 16-month Iraq withdrawal plan
4 hours ago


Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
If this President squanders the achievement of our military it will be unforgivable.


He meant 16 months from the time he said it, not 16 months from his inauguration.

He meant this past March, i think.


Don't expect the Obamedia to point that out though.

1024 Cato the Elder  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:16:11pm

re: #847 jcm

Ohhh boy, here we go again.


Barack Obama: Administration willing to talk to Iran 'without preconditions'
Julian Borger, diplomatic editor
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 21 January 2009 18.07 GMT


1) Direct talks with the Mad Mullahs legitimizes the regime and strenghtens their hand domestically. ALL BAD

2) Nuclear weapons are a fact of nature. You can't undo nature and knowledge. Take certain materials, obtain critical mass, KABLOOIE! You ca not put the nuclear genie back in the bottle because it makes you feel good.

The thing is, he can say that all he wants. Not gonna happen. Iran, you see, has itself set preconditions for any talk with the US. Among other things, we have to give up supporting Israel.

So Obama can say he was willing to meet, but the Iranian preconditions made that impossible. Bringing us right back...to the status quo!

1025 Taqiyyotomist  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:17:10pm

re: #945 sattv4u2

I'll admit my circle of acquaintances is not very wide. But I'm not an asshat. My "so they say" stands, not as judgement of your friends, but as fact. Taqiyya as a doctrinal tactic by Muslims is also a fact. You have your reasons for trusting Muslims, and apparantly they outweigh any doctrinal, Islamic reasons for not trusting them.

Maybe someday I'll get to know a Muslim or two. Maybe not. It is unlikely, since I don't, at this time, trust anyone who says they follow the Quran and the example of Mohammad. I have studied both. Maybe I'll be saved from certain death by a Muslim someday, and be forced to rethink. Maybe.

Facts remain. Some Muslims say they abhor "radical", or fundamentalist Islam, yet remain in Islam. Islam, that is, the words of the Quran, and the sayings of Mohammed, says that Muslims are not only permitted, but required to lie, to pretend friendship, and to hide their true beliefs in many circumstances.

You know their hearts, you say. I hope you're right. I wish I had such powers.

1026 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:18:09pm

re: #1007 JHW

If you open your Qu'ran to the beginning of Surah 3, Al-Imran, you will note the passage that states: "...none knows the meaning thereof except Allah and those who are firmly grounded in knowledge." i.e., can read Arabic. It continues, "...none takes heed exept those gifted with understanding." So, a Devout Muslim is fluent in Arabic.

1027 Spare O'Lake  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:18:27pm

re: #736 Killgore Trout

Nope. People here in the US are allowed to advocate all sorts of horrible and distasteful ideas including fascism, communism, anarchy, monarchy, etc. We have a free market place of ideas and some of the ideas stink but the market must remain free and open. To start putting limits on freedom of ideas is very dangerous as Geert and the rest of Europe is now starting to learn.

Corect me if I am wrong:
You may not yell fire in a crowded theatre.
You may not publish a secular book which contains a present call for genocidal slaughter of Americans.
You may not practice a religion in America which carries out human sacrifice of American virgins.
These beliefs and ideas are not protected (I trust) by the US constitution.

Islam is a religion with over a billion members, the vast majority of whom are peaceful and law-abiding people who do not make a habit of obeying the commandments to kill Jews or infidels. This being the case, it would simply be unfair to the vast majority of Muslims to outlaw the entire religion based on certain precepts which are for the most part not observed.

A more equitable solution is available. If advocating genocide is not a crime (I think it probably is) then criminalize it. Then charge the religious advocates of genocidal conduct with crimes and let them present their Constitutional defences. Then, if convicted, punish them within the existing criminal justice system. If they happen to be non-citizens, then deport them after they are convicted.

Yes, it is very dangerous to put limits on freedom of ideas.
But it is also very dangerous not to put limits on incitement to egregious criminal conduct.

1028 n in wi  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:18:30pm

re: #992 Iron Fist

I've mentioned this before. What Obama appears to be working himself up to is a unilateral nuclear disarmament of the United States, coupled with an end to research and development of anti-ballistic missile defenses. If the Republicans had any balls, they'd ask him publicly why he wants American cities to be nuked, which American cities he wants to see nuked, and what should America do after we've been nuked.

The motherfucker is flirting with treason, and he's only been in office a little over 24 hours. This is going to be a long four years.


Unilateral nuclear disarmament= Gun control on steroids

1029 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:18:48pm
1030 Dustyvet  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:19:18pm

re: #815 Nevergiveup

Unbelievable...Obama Becomes First President To Skip the "Salute To Heroes" Ball
—DrewM.

No time for Medal of Honor and Purple Heart recipients or paralyzed vets? Yeah, honeymoon...over.

[Link: ace.mu.nu...]

While Jesse Ventura was the Govenor of Minnesota, a former Navy Seal and Vietnam Veteran, he visited the Minneapolis Veterans Hospital only once in the four years he held office.

1031 formercorpsman  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:20:14pm

re: #932 Walter L. Newton

You and I agree.

I think it might have been you that I referenced the phrase, "they're in the wires" about a week ago. If not, please suffer my analogy.

Right now, we have scenarios where they are "in the wires" whether it is the countless small examples of individual jihad, or places like the Red House compound of ul-Fuqra in southern Virginia.

The problem is that is should be happening now. It is not. Once I hear we have suspicious individuals "accidentally" boarding school buses full of kids, malls being canvassed, and daughters being killed for not wanting to donn the veil, the problem is at our door step.

1032 JHW  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:20:31pm

re: #1021 NelsFree

Are you sure of this (the learning Arabic part)? We've all seen the filmed spectacle of young boys in the madrassas in Pakistan weaving and bobbing as they memorize the Koran in Arabic. I'm finding it hard to believe they understand the language. The same can be said of a number of north African countries. If you can point me to a source that confirms these people are bi-lingual at least, I'd be grateful. I'm having my doubts that all these Pashtun speakers for instance, also have a working knowledge of Arabic.

1033 Archimedes  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:21:11pm

re: #975 jwb7605

It's not the intellectuals that fail us for social decay. We elected them, read them, or studied under them.

Intellectuals lead the way. We learn from them. We are influenced by them. The ideas the imbue society by-and-large come from intellectuals. Intellectuals not just today, but from the past who are still influencing us, both for good and evil. Postmodernism is an intellectual movement, for example and is coming to dominate the West, and it's very destructive of our liberties. This is why it's good to read the ideas of the Founders, when intellectuals were better as a rule.

1034 n in wi  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:21:42pm

re: #1027 Spare O'Lake

We cannot yell "Fire" in a crowded theater.
We can, however, yell "Theater" at a crowded fire.
Try it sometime, oh the looks. Some people actually will get it.

1035 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:23:09pm
1036 JHW  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:23:29pm

re: #1026 NelsFree

Ah, I'm sorry, I missed your answer here while I was typing, but regardless of that passage, it would appear to me that a lot of Muslims would not measure up to the "devout " part if it was conditional on a knowledge of Arabic.

1037 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:24:07pm

re: #1027 Spare O'Lake

A more equitable solution is available. If advocating genocide is not a crime (I think it probably is) then criminalize it. Then charge the religious advocates of genocidal conduct with crimes and let them present their Constitutional defences. Then, if convicted, punish them within the existing criminal justice system. If they happen to be non-citizens, then deport them after they are convicted.

The mistake is thinking these laws are only going to be used against Muslims. What happens if the public decides there's genocide in Gaza? Are you going to try Zionist Jews and rabbis?

1038 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:25:03pm
1039 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:25:19pm

BTW this has been a great thread. Lots of good debate and plenty of good ideas. Kudos, Lizards.

1040 Achilles Tang  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:25:41pm

re: #1032 JHW

My understanding is that many learn enough to know the words in the Koran, but not to speak the language. Try to imagine someone trying to communicate with you who only learned English from the Bible, or the Old Testament.....

However, many do not learn Arabic at all. They read translations of the Koran, but for understanding and interpretation they have to rely on Mullahs in the Mosque, and in Europe most of those are imported from Arabic speaking countries for that very reason. It is a good ploy to keep the faith pure.

1041 JHW  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:27:54pm

re: #1040 Naso Tang

Thank you, that was the question I had and addresses the point I was (however poorly) was trying to make.

1042 pingjockey  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:28:01pm

re: #1038 buzzsawmonkey
Would you say the Koran advocates violence against non-believers?

1043 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:28:11pm

re: #1009 Naso Tang

Yes we can debate the differences in the holy books and I have no problem recognizing that one has many higher values than the other, which has resulted in different forms of society.

But that is not what I was arguing about. I was simply saying that one has the inherent capacity to change. The other does not.

Which religion has the capacity to change? Christianity? The message of peace and love has not changed. The Inquisition was NOT based on Christian values. The Crusades were an attempt to defend Christians from Muslim harassment while visiting Holy sites. Judaism? The rules have not changed. Islam? Ain't. Gonna. Change.

1044 keyword  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:29:04pm

re: #1042 pingjockey

Would you say the Koran advocates violence against non-believers?

Does a bear shit in the woods?

1045 Achilles Tang  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:29:07pm

re: #1042 pingjockey

Would you say the Koran advocates violence against non-believers?

Surely you jest?

1046 Cato the Elder  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:29:16pm

re: #275 Charles

That's interesting. Didn't know that - I thought there were laws explicitly banning the book.

It's not hard to find a copy of "Mein Kampf" in Germany. After Hitler came to power, every couple getting married in civil ceremony was given a copy. I remember seeing them occasionally on the shelves of my friends' parents. Many were doubltess kept as a memorial of their marriage. Many, also doubltess, for less savory reasons. But they were never banned.

And since church weddings are optional in Germany, but civil registration is compulsory, I mean everybody had them.

Printing is another matter.

But right across the border in Austria, you can buy Mein Kampf and Hitler comic books at every newsstand. My eyes nearly popped out the first time I saw that!

1047 pingjockey  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:30:37pm

re: #1044 keyword

re: #1045 Naso Tang
Tongue in cheek. That 'book' advocates all manner of violence upon infidels.

1048 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:30:56pm
1049 pingjockey  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:31:21pm

re: #1045 Naso Tang
And don't call me Shirley.

1050 pingjockey  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:32:59pm

re: #1048 buzzsawmonkey
Ah. So if I had Soros' money and bought the tv time I could advocate wiping Israel off the map as long as no one acted upon my lunatic ranting?

1051 NelsFree  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:33:02pm

re: #1032 JHW

Are you sure of this (the learning Arabic part)? We've all seen the filmed spectacle of young boys in the madrassas in Pakistan weaving and bobbing as they memorize the Koran in Arabic. I'm finding it hard to believe they understand the language. The same can be said of a number of north African countries. If you can point me to a source that confirms these people are bi-lingual at least, I'd be grateful. I'm having my doubts that all these Pashtun speakers for instance, also have a working knowledge of Arabic.


First, let me say that, after this post, I'm off to get coffee (which apparently was discovered and refined by Muslims in Yemen). Second, PLEASE don't make me believe you are basing fluency in Arabic for non-Arabs by watching YouTube! Allow me to invite you to the Al-Iman School here in Raleigh, NC, where Arabic language is part of the curriculum. Now, I'm off to get a cup of Cowboy Blend. Ye-hah Jee-had, y'all!

1052 Archimedes  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:33:04pm

re: #1046 Cato the Elder

It's not hard to find a copy of "Mein Kampf" in Germany. After Hitler came to power, every couple getting married in civil ceremony was given a copy. I remember seeing them occasionally on the shelves of my friends' parents. Many were doubltess kept as a memorial of their marriage. Many, also doubltess, for less savory reasons. But they were never banned.

And since church weddings are optional in Germany, but civil registration is compulsory, I mean everybody had them.

Printing is another matter.

But right across the border in Austria, you can buy Mein Kampf and Hitler comic books at every newsstand. My eyes nearly popped out the first time I saw that!

Interestingly, a 3D game computer game, Wolfenstein 3D, in which you shot Nazis was banned in Europe in the 1990s.

1053 keyword  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:34:39pm

re: #1047 pingjockey

re: #1045 Naso Tang
Tongue in cheek. That 'book' advocates all manner of violence upon infidels.

The violence toward others as described in the koran is a timeless one - an evergreen, if you will. Always kill the unbelievers.
Now the bible advocates some violence as well. But it is my understanding that is was written for specific situations, which had already taken place. More descriptive, as compared to instructional.
/nuance

1054 Pyrocles  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:39:05pm

According to Ali Sina at Faithfreedom.org, the vast majority of the world's Muslims cannot actually read the Quran to know how violent it really is. Most Quranic study in non-Arab Muslim countries does consist of the memorization of Arabic passages whose true meaning is unknown to the students.

Most of the ex-muslims on Faithfreedom left Islam after reading the Quran in their native language for the first time, realizing the true extent of its calls violence. Read the ex-Muslim testimonies there, they're pretty interesting.

re: #1032 JHW

Are you sure of this (the learning Arabic part)? We've all seen the filmed spectacle of young boys in the madrassas in Pakistan weaving and bobbing as they memorize the Koran in Arabic. I'm finding it hard to believe they understand the language. The same can be said of a number of north African countries. If you can point me to a source that confirms these people are bi-lingual at least, I'd be grateful. I'm having my doubts that all these Pashtun speakers for instance, also have a working knowledge of Arabic.

1055 JHW  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:39:17pm

re: #1051 NelsFree

Thanks for the invitation, but I'll pass. N.C. is almost as far as Japan for me, and I have no desire to learn Arabic this late in life. Enjoy the coffee.

1056 buzzdroid  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:40:32pm

afaik , wilders has NOT called for the koran to be banned. only to treat it the same as scientology or any other cult - for which there are laws in the netherlands.


disagree with it of course, but its all to do with context - some european countries have very strict laws to prevent the free operation of religious cults.

wilders wanted to put islam in the "cult" category.

1057 Cato the Elder  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:41:43pm

re: #348 Kenneth

Nope. The Bible is officially banned in Saudi Arabia. So are crucifixes and teddy bears.

I've wondered about something for a while now: Why ban the Hebrew and Christian Bibles when the Koran itself purports to quote from them at length? The "taurat" and "ingeel" are supposedly from God, so why wouldn't they be read?

Then it finally hit me. The key word is "purports". As anyone who has read all three books can attest, what the Koran considers to be stories from the earlier books are usually very different from the way we know them. Things are mixed up, jumbled, skewed, falsified and distorted, or just made up out of whole cloth. Mahomet had heard a lot of Jewish and Christian traditions, but he got 'em wrong. He thinks Abraham and Job (not to mention Alexander of Macedonia) were prophets. Abraham was a patriarch, Job is a character in a didactic novel. And Alexander was a pagan emperor.

So banning them makes sense. If the believers started reading for themselves and saw how little comparison there is between their stories and the originals, it might raise some inconvenient questions.

Of course, Muslims will claim that we (Jews and Christians) distorted our books, and the Koran simply restores the original. This is where textual historical criticism comes in. But you won't catch the Muslims reading that, either.

1058 Achilles Tang  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:42:13pm

re: #1043 NelsFree

Which religion has the capacity to change? Christianity? The message of peace and love has not changed. The Inquisition was NOT based on Christian values. The Crusades were an attempt to defend Christians from Muslim harassment while visiting Holy sites. Judaism? The rules have not changed. Islam? Ain't. Gonna. Change.

I agree and disagree. Every religion is an interpretation by humans and different interpretations can be made at different times, and certainly are by different people (or there would be only one Christian church, for example).

The inquisition and other examples were based on the Christian values of some. Even Islam has its splits, mainly two, but even that is based mainly on a prophet succession dispute, not interpretation of the Koran to any degree.

The crusades were an attempt at conquest and conversion or death of infidels (not to mention plunder). Period.

Having said that, there is much less call to violence in the Bible than in the Koran, and Christianity allows for non literal interpretations of the words. Islam does not. Hence the obvious differences in those religious cultures today.

1059 2by2  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:42:14pm

re: #1018 yma o hyd

Heh - loss of freedom does not always go hand-in-hand with actual bloodshed.

as for the Enlightenment - agree as far as political ideas are concerned, but these are not the only ideas in the free marketplace. I'm thinking of the rise of the learned scoieties, like the Royal society ehre in GB (Newton was a member) - I'm thinking of mathematics, physics, natural sciences - arts, music, litarature: these all are also 'ideas' which ahve to compete.
And then we have the economical ideas - Smith, Locke - these ideas were indeed freely exchanged.

It is an error to limit 'idea' just to the political sphere, because if we disregard the importance of all those ideas, it will be to our detriment.

In fact - the decrease of political power in the Ummah came because iy closed its borders to un-islamic ideas, just as the west, from the Renaissance onwards, opened its minds ...

Sure,
and I appreciate the depth of your response, true about the ideas, and yes there have been many and yes as long as they stayed in the academic environment of science, art, philosophy they truly enlightened the populace as long as they had access to them. (Which opens another can of worms in regards to access aka education and who controls it)
On the other hand as soon as those ideas, or fractions of them entered the public realm they became bargaining chips for power in Europe and were used as such.
Millions sunk into the grave to uphold 'ideas', which were just aforementioned truncated ideas: bargaining chips to power, used by the pupils of Machiavelli.
How is it possible to arrive at the guillotine of a Robespierre from the gardens of a Voltaire, if not for the corruption of ideas in favor of a tribal interpretation of them?

1060 Charles Johnson  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:42:23pm

re: #1056 buzzdroid

afaik , wilders has NOT called for the koran to be banned.

Yes, he has:

[Link: www.militantislammonitor.org...]

1061 buzzdroid  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:42:41pm

re: #1054 Pyrocles

According to Ali Sina at Faithfreedom.org, the vast majority of the world's Muslims cannot actually read the Quran to know how violent it really is. Most Quranic study in non-Arab Muslim countries does consist of the memorization of Arabic passages whose true meaning is unknown to the students.

Most of the ex-muslims on Faithfreedom left Islam after reading the Quran in their native language for the first time, realizing the true extent of its calls violence. Read the ex-Muslim testimonies there, they're pretty interesting.

i'm not religious, but didnt Jesus warn of false prophets being controlled by Satan?

if i was a Christian, the very existence of the Koran, only prooves the prediction of Jesus.

1062 Achilles Tang  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:43:50pm

re: #1049 pingjockey

And don't call me Shirley.

Arrghhh.

1063 buzzdroid  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:44:12pm

re: #1060 Charles

Yes, he did:

[Link: www.militantislammonitor.org...]

no probs. i stand corrected.


that IS extreme, to say the least.

*buries my head in hands... *
wilders seemed to be quite a smart guy...

1064 JHW  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:44:17pm

re: #1054 Pyrocles

Many thanks to you for the answer, this was the thrust of my post, and I agree fully, it is inconceivable to me that even a small majority of the world's
50 gazillion Muslims have even a basic understanding of Arabic. I agree with your assessment of Ali Sina's site, I visit it often and a great deal of what I've learned about Islam is from resources there.

1065 Wishbone  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:52:42pm

re: #1017 Iron Fist

The Japanese didn't use people to temper swords, at least not that I'm aware of, but the did use people to test swords on.

Hai...... Tameshigiri

People who haven't studied it tend to think of Tokugawa Japan as a tranquil, polite society, and it was. They enforced the tranquility and politeness with a brutality that rivaled any of the most barbarous kingdoms in all of history.

Ask the Ninja clans all about that.

1066 mjwsatx  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:53:53pm

re: #1048 buzzsawmonkey

Yes, Buzz. The Koran advocates violence against non-believers and certainly violence has been done as a result of this advocacy.

Who do we prosecute?

1067 Cato the Elder  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 1:59:14pm

re: #1021 NelsFree

Muslims are required to learn the Qu'ran (correct spelling) AND to learn Arabic in order to understand it. The ones who don't are, once again, Infidels. SILENCE! Sorry, that slipped out.

That's simply not true. The only requirement to be a Muslim is to say the shahada and follow the five pillars. Many ordinary non-Arab Muslims know a smattering of phrases in Arabic, and not much else. That does NOT make them infidels. If it did, there would be far fewer Muslims in the world.

The fact is that the Arabic in the Koran has very little in common with demotic Arabic. Many of the "reciters" (the boys who learn the whole Koran by heart), even the Arabic speakers, do not know what it is they're reciting. I can learn from rote repetition how to chant "Beowulf" all the way through and still not know Old English!

And scholars estimate that something like one fifth to one sixth of the Koran is, frankly, just plain incomprehensible even to those steeped in Classical Arabic. There are similar cases in the Hebrew and Christian Bibles where we just don't know what a word or phrase actually means, especially if it's a hapax legomenon, but the incidence of such puzzles is far higher in the Koran.

So, to recapitulate: You do NOT have to learn Arabic to be a Muslim, and many of those Indonesian and Afghani boys in the madrassahs have NO IDEA what they're chanting. If you say the shahada (Lā ilaha illa al-Lāh, Muhammadun rasūlu l-Lāh) and endeavor to follow the pillars, you are a Muslim.

Oh, and the "correct spelling" is not "Qu'ran" but "Qur'an" - although since it's a transliteration, even "Koran" (or in Gibbon's day, "Coran") will do perfectly well.

You shouldn't pretend to be an expert around here when you're not.

1068 Pastorius  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 2:01:24pm

#777 Charles,
I would say that anyone who advocates for the overthrow of the Constitution and the replacement of the Constitution with a totalitarian dictatorship whereby people are to be murdered for exercising Freedom of Conscience should be subjected to some kind of punishment.

I'm not familiar with the Christian Reconstructionists, but if they believe, for instance, that homosexuals, adulterers, and apostates should be put to death, then yes, I do believe they should be subject to our already existing law against Sedition.

1069 wiffersnapper  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 2:07:34pm

Best of luck to Geert.

1070 Pastorius  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 2:09:18pm

839 Zombie
... and Kilgore Trout,
I must admit, you guys are making some sense to me. The reason I say that is because I realize that if we begin trying and convicting people for sedition left and right then we come upon the question/problem of who determines what sedition is. And then, perhaps, it will be determined that Geert Wilders, and people like him, are seditionists because they speak out against the "Free Speech" of Muslims who seek to kill all those who are not Muslims.

Here's a question (I posed it earlier and did not receive an answer that I could see): Should the American Nazi Party be allowed to be voted into office?

Considering the fact that Nazis advocate against Freedom of Conscience, I would say no.

And, likewise with Islamist parties. No, they ought not be allowed to attain any political power in America. I can not find a reason for it.

I go back to the Dutch politician who said that, if Muslims become a majority, they have the right to vote Sharia into the law, because "That's Democracy."

That is not Democracy, and we all know it.

It seems to me we are up against a logical inconsistency in our system here, and we'd better come up with an answer, because if we allow demographics to answer the question, we will find ourselves in the Dark Ages.

1071 Green Helmet Guy  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 2:09:42pm

re: #76 Killgore Trout

Think about what is entailed in the banning of the Quran. Are police going to raid homes and arrest people? Will reciting a prayer land people in court? Will people have to worship in basements and hope their neighbors don't call the police? It's a nightmare scenario.

Actually... FYI, In Israel, for example, you can get thrown off the Temple Mount by the Israeli police for reciting or appearing to recite a prayer (Jewish or Christian) other than Islamic prayer at the whim of the Waqf.

It exists.

The Banning of Jewish Prayer (or any other prayer than Islamic) at a Jewish holy site in Israel ... so messed up.

I wonder why the waqf is so afraid of non-Muslims praying on Temple Mount?

1072 Charles Johnson  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 2:16:00pm

re: #1068 Pastorius

#777 Charles,
I would say that anyone who advocates for the overthrow of the Constitution and the replacement of the Constitution with a totalitarian dictatorship whereby people are to be murdered for exercising Freedom of Conscience should be subjected to some kind of punishment.

Even if they take no action? So you're in favor of criminalizing speech?

I'm not familiar with the Christian Reconstructionists, but if they believe, for instance, that homosexuals, adulterers, and apostates should be put to death, then yes, I do believe they should be subject to our already existing law against Sedition.

They do indeed believe those kinds of things: Christian Reconstructionism:

...prominent advocates of Christian Reconstructionism have written that according to their understanding, God's law approves of the death penalty not only for murder, but also for propagators of idolatry[3][4][5], active homosexuals[6], adulterers, practitioners of witchcraft, and blasphemers[7], and perhaps even recalcitrant youths

Reconstructionist Gary North has also called for women who have abortions to be publicly executed.

1073 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 2:24:33pm

re: #777 Charles

We also have some extremist Christian groups in this country who openly advocate for the overthrow of the Constitution, and the establishment of a theocracy. Some of them are very influential in government -- check out the Christian Reconstructionist movement if you don't believe me. Do you want to prosecute and imprison them too?

I don't think we prosecute for treason in the US anymore.

1074 Wilderstad  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 2:25:36pm

re: #687 unreconstructed rebel

The difference being that Christians only threaten you with hellfire.
Muslims say convert, pay jizya be a dhimmi, or die. Your choice usually at the wrong end of a weapon.

1075 Achilles Tang  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 2:27:02pm

re: #1070 Pastorius

839 Zombie
Here's a question (I posed it earlier and did not receive an answer that I could see): Should the American Nazi Party be allowed to be voted into office?

Considering the fact that Nazis advocate against Freedom of Conscience, I would say no.

And, likewise with Islamist parties. No, they ought not be allowed to attain any political power in America. I can not find a reason for it.

As one who believes in individual responsibility, to quote GWB, if we allow Nazis to achieve the position of being able to win a popular vote then we have failed long before the vote happens, and have only ourselves to blame, just as the Gazan "civilians, have themselves to blame.

I go back to the Dutch politician who said that, if Muslims become a majority, they have the right to vote Sharia into the law, because "That's Democracy."

That is not Democracy, and we all know it.

Actually it is democracy, in a suicidal mode.

It seems to me we are up against a logical inconsistency in our system here, and we'd better come up with an answer, because if we allow demographics to answer the question, we will find ourselves in the Dark Ages.

That is the ultimate test of our present democracy, is it not?

1076 Achilles Tang  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 2:28:18pm

re: #1073 Slumbering Behemoth

I don't think we prosecute for treason in the US anymore.

Don't hold your breath.

1077 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 2:33:20pm

re: #1076 Naso Tang

My scales! They're turning blue!

I should have put a sarc tag in my 1073.

1078 Achilles Tang  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 2:38:42pm

re: #1077 Slumbering Behemoth

You should watch 24 more often.

;)

1079 realburke  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 2:43:09pm

The decision to prosecute Wilders fits the recent convergence of Christian and Islamic fundamentalist ideas on several issues. Christian fundamentalist representatives find common ground with their Islamic counterparts on issues like abortion, gay rights, evolution, women rights, the list goes on. There seems to be an almost intuitive coming together between what at first might seem uneasy bedfellows.

Politically all this translates through the leverage a small religious party, the Christen Unie (CU, Christian Union) holds in the Dutch cabinet in making up the deciding majority in the Second Chamber. Its larger christian democrat partner, the Christen Democratisch Appèl (CDA, Christian Democrat Appeal), to keep the balance, is sensitive to the demands of the CU. Justice minister Hirsch Ballin (CDA), a staunge catholic himself, seems to have taken it upon himself, in a bid to please both his own Christian constituency as well as the Islamic community, to go on a crusade. In May 2008 he had the cartoonist Gregorius Nekschot arrested on the grounds that his cartoons were an insult to Islam.

A couple weeks ago the Second chamber discussed whether or not to drop the article of law 147 under which he was arrested. Christian and Islamic fundamentalists are of course in favour of keeping it, but an unworkable compromise sought by the third party making up the coalition, the Partij van de Arbeid (PvdA, The Workers Pary) seems in the making. Drop the current act, so insulting a religion is no longer an offence. However, at the same time add a paragraph to "clarify" article 137c (Anti Discrimination Laws) which will allow any person who feels him or herself insulted because of his or her religion to pursue a case in court. Note that the complaint brought against Wilders is largely build around his comparison of the Koran with Mein Kampf and the assumed association it draws with its followers as nazis and not insulting Islam as such. Wilders'inculpation is a very worrying step.

1080 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 2:43:33pm

re: #1078 Naso Tang

I was really into it during the first few seasons or so, but have since lost interest. Maybe I'll hit the interwebs and catch up on what I've been missing.

1081 Killgore Trout  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 2:45:32pm

re: #1075 Naso Tang


As one who believes in individual responsibility, to quote GWB, if we allow Nazis to achieve the position of being able to win a popular vote then we have failed long before the vote happens, and have only ourselves to blame,


Well said.

1082 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 2:48:38pm
1083 JHW  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 2:50:04pm

re: #1082 ploome hineni

That's what I thought ploome, another poster took issue with my points I was trying to make on that.

1084 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 2:55:56pm
1085 Achilles Tang  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 2:57:22pm

re: #1080 Slumbering Behemoth

I was really into it during the first few seasons or so, but have since lost interest. Maybe I'll hit the interwebs and catch up on what I've been missing.

Same here, but I get tired of conspiracy layered on conspiracy and the technical computer concept behind this one is too far fetched to be taken seriously. I like the action though, and the bad guys usually go down, eventually, as one would wish.

1086 JHW  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 2:59:46pm

re: #1084 ploome hineni

Yes, Cato made a very good post on that , #1067. I'm guessing without the rabble-rousing mullahs, most Muslims would have little idea about their religion besides the 5 pillars.

1087 Achilles Tang  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 3:01:51pm

re: #1082 ploome hineni

you say:

there is no authorized universally accepted transation of the koran
ONLY the arabic version is accepted

True, which is why only arabic speaking, certified, Mullahs are allowed to explain it and, as been pointed out earlier, a good portion of it is not understandable by mortals. I may well have been based on Nostradamus, for all the sense it makes.

/Damned smart those Islamists are.

1088 Achilles Tang  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 3:02:50pm

re: #1081 Killgore Trout

Well said.

Gee, thanks.

:)

1089 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 3:04:47pm
1090 [deleted]  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 3:10:03pm
1091 nikis-knight  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 3:15:17pm

re: #1075 Naso Tang

As one who believes in individual responsibility, to quote GWB, if we allow Nazis to achieve the position of being able to win a popular vote then we have failed long before the vote happens, and have only ourselves to blame, just as the Gazan "civilians, have themselves to blame.


Well, sure, but would we deserve to have our civilization destroyed at that point? Along with all the innocents who would die?
Just because we might fail to promote our values doesn't mean we have to accept whatever terrible consequences would befall the world from a Nazi or radical Islamic America.
It would probably mean an immanent revolution that I shudder to think about.

1092 Wilderstad  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 3:24:13pm

re: #909 midwestgak

There is no Shari'a court in Canada.. I hope it never ever occurs.
It was proposed, in the province of Ontario, but Premier Dalton McGuinty scotched that.

1093 Pastorius  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 4:18:36pm

I don't mean to be flip, and in fact, my flippancy may be the result of my not understanding some nuance of this discussion,

but,

it seems to me that, if we believe that a totalitarian fascist party ought to be able to attain power through Democratic means, then I guess we approve of what happened in Nazi Germany.

I don't mean to say we approve of what the Nazis did, but we approve of the idea that they were able to take power.

Hitler took power by winning an election in a Parliamentary system. He then consolidated his power through a series of lies and threats, and violence.

There is no doubt Islamists would do the same thing were they able to achieve a victory in a Democratic election.

That is their track record.

Naso Tang said: ... if we allow Nazis to achieve the position of being able to win a popular vote then we have failed long before the vote happens ...


I ask: How did Germany fail long before the elections which brought Hitler to power.

It could be said that Germany failed in turning to a leftist government in the 20's. It could be said that Germany failed in that they did not possess sufficient moral backbone to shout down the racist tone of the Nazi Party.

But, if these things are true, then it is clear that we have the same problem in many of the countries of the Western world, and I believe things are going in that direction here in the U.S., when one takes into consideration our belief in PC and our willingness to put up with characters like Jeremiah Wright and Islamists like Ibrahim Hooper. Additionally, our pendulum swings ever wider towards a time where we may end up with a leftist government like that of 20's Germany.

So, if we are to fail, in the sense that Naso Tang would imply, would we be obligated to allow Nazis to take power against our Constitution?

At what point do we say enough is enough. Now, when we have power, or down the road, when the Nazis have more power.

Many in this discussion seem to be advocating that if we can not win this battle in the marketplace of ideas, then we don't deserve to win.

I'm sorry, that is not really true, according to our Constitution.

Our Constitution is there to protect us against the whims of the marketplace of ideas.

1094 Pastorius  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 4:38:58pm

Charles,
Gary North seems like a real nut to me. I had never heard of the man. I have known a few Christians who struck me as extremists in that mold. However, they went to a tiny, very intellectual church, which had a very hard time attracting women. They were kind of like The Big Bang Theory of churches (if you have ever seen that TV show).

They were too busy smoking pipes and discussing Philosophy to pose any real threat. And, they were not the type to associate with Christian Taliban types who might provide real muscle.

That being said, I am aware that ideas can catch fire and grow over time. However, having spent a lot of time around Christians of various sorts (in fact, working with Churches was my business for awhile), I have never known a Christian to advocate the death penalty for homosexuality, adultery, or apostasy.

And, such Christians should never gain political power.

Note, by the way, that unlike Muslims I do not simply deny that such people are Christians. They are Christians with a distorted idea of the Bible.

One thing that many Christians don't realize is that the dialectical process of Jewish Torah-analysis had an effect on Christ the man. For instance, as I understand it, when he said that the whole law is fulfilled in the commands to love God and love your neighbor, that idea was already part of Jewish tradition. It's not part of Mosaic law, but instead, it rose from Jewish dialectical thinking.

And, in the sense that it did, His Words and His Actions do supersede, or fulfill the strictures of the Old Testament.

In Islam, a man like Tariq Ramadan may say that stoning for apostasy is "unimplementable", simply because he does not have political support for such an idea in the Western world.

With regards to Christianiaty, however, in the case that you might hear such a thing, it would actually go against the teachings of Christ Himself.

And, my point in saying that is, Christianity is qualitatively different from Islam, in that it is capable of a progression of ideas, and in fact has shown itself to progress.

That being said, I am cognizant of the fact that religions are, to a large extent, defined by their actions. So, no matter what the basic texts of the religion may say, the actions of adherents are representative of the real beliefs of the body of Christians at any given time.

However, if we are to define Christianity by it's actions, then it truly is a lamb of a religion, compared to the wolf religion of Islam.

Christians just do not kill on a massive level as do Muslims.

In Islam, the Gary North's have massive power. In Christianity, they don't.

1095 Achilles Tang  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 4:39:02pm

re: #1091 nikis-knight

Well, sure, but would we deserve to have our civilization destroyed at that point? Along with all the innocents who would die?
Just because we might fail to promote our values doesn't mean we have to accept whatever terrible consequences would befall the world from a Nazi or radical Islamic America.
It would probably mean an immanent revolution that I shudder to think about.

You miss the point. This is not something that could happen overnight. You seem to suggest that you would resist, at the last moment. What would you have been doing long before?

1096 Achilles Tang  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 4:57:14pm

re: #1093 Pastorius


Naso Tang said: ... if we allow Nazis to achieve the position of being able to win a popular vote then we have failed long before the vote happens ...

I ask: How did Germany fail long before the elections which brought Hitler to power.

It could be said that Germany failed in turning to a leftist government in the 20's. It could be said that Germany failed in that they did not possess sufficient moral backbone to shout down the racist tone of the Nazi Party.

But, if these things are true, then it is clear that we have the same problem in many of the countries of the Western world, and I believe things are going in that direction here in the U.S., when one takes into consideration our belief in PC and our willingness to put up with characters like Jeremiah Wright and Islamists like Ibrahim Hooper. Additionally, our pendulum swings ever wider towards a time where we may end up with a leftist government like that of 20's Germany.

So, if we are to fail, in the sense that Naso Tang would imply, would we be obligated to allow Nazis to take power against our Constitution?

At what point do we say enough is enough. Now, when we have power, or down the road, when the Nazis have more power.

My point is simply that by the time the likes of Nazis took power, other than by a coup, our constitution would likely already have been amended so as to allow it. However there are many factors in this equation. It was before my time, but the economic and political situation in Germany in the 30's was such that, dare I say it, the people were yearning for a savior to help them and remove the yoke imposed by the victors, us, in WWI. Germans willingly embraced Hitler. I do not compare our current savior in that vein, but the economic problems we have now do raise some reason for concern another election or two down the road, if they still exist then.

As to the racist tone. Do you remember what that tone was in the USA then?

Many in this discussion seem to be advocating that if we can not win this battle in the marketplace of ideas, then we don't deserve to win.

I'm sorry, that is not really true, according to our Constitution.

Our Constitution is there to protect us against the whims of the marketplace of ideas.

As I said, the danger is not from violating the constitution as much as it is allowing it to be so distorted that it becomes something else.

1097 cracker-crusader  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 5:19:38pm

The likely upshot of the "hate-speech" laws is that when the Fascists take power, there'll already be legal machinery in place to shutdown any and all dissent.

What form is the coming Fascism likely to take? I suggest in Europe pretty soon Identity Politics is going to come full circle as the BNP, Vlaams Belang, etc begin to make HUGE gains in voter support. followed by yet more Islamic aggression on the streets and banlieues, followed by yet more gains etc...

I am very wary of the nightmare that awaits Europe. Yugoslavia is symptomatic of what has always ailed Europe - too many tribes, not enough resources.

1098 Pastorius  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 5:34:50pm

Naso Teng,

Arguing over history and how it may reflect current and future events is something upon we can disagree. Certainly, I do not know I am right, but I don't agree with your interpretation. Hitler came to power under the existing Constitution of Germany, and as I understand it, that Constitution was protective of a rather modern, human-rights protecting Parliamentary Democracy.

I believe that could happen in Western governments if we do not come up with some sort of legal antidote to Islamism.

1099 akak  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 6:00:19pm

wow, a whopping nine people complained said the Dutch prosecutor!

1100 aengus  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 6:06:11pm

I'm not sure what all the fuss is about. Wilders' proposal to ban the Koran (which I disagree with - we all of us need to know what the Koran says) is not evidence of totalitarian but rather a part of the legacy of de-Nazification.

Wilders proposes to ban the Koran in Holand just as Mein Kampf was banned under de-Nazification policies which the US instituted in Europe in the initial immediate post-war years for good or ill.

Wilders is a radical liberal. He is not "right-wing" except in the superficial sense that his fairly modest immigration restrictionist policies run counter to current liberal orthodoxy.

1101 Colonel Panik  Wed, Jan 21, 2009 7:28:19pm

re: #76 Killgore Trout

Think about what is entailed in the banning of the Quran. Are police going to raid homes and arrest people? Will reciting a prayer land people in court? Will people have to worship in basements and hope their neighbors don't call the police? It's a nightmare scenario.

The Wooden Shoed Sturmabteilung is coming for your Quran, Killgore!
I can hear the clatter of their clogs on the cobblestones!

The nightmare you fear is not the one that awaits you.

1102 jestiny  Sat, Jan 24, 2009 11:36:11am

In the movie, Wilders does not say to ban the Koran. He wants to remove the verses that call for murder and jihad.

1103 Charles Johnson  Sun, Jan 25, 2009 9:23:43am

re: #1102 jestiny

In the movie, Wilders does not say to ban the Koran. He wants to remove the verses that call for murder and jihad.

I did not say that he called for the Koran to be banned in the movie 'Fitna'. But he has called for the banning:

[Link: www.militantislammonitor.org...]

I'm not sure why people are trying to deny this. Is it because it tends to diminish the sympathy for his positions?


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ...
Cheechako
Yesterday
Views: 79 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
2 weeks ago
Views: 253 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1