It Really Is that Bad...
If you think the Islamist threat is over-stated, I would urge you to examine this 6 part series from the British show Dispatch. (H/T JMJ2 and the 910 Blog) I watched the first three parts, and was utterly amazed, and I've already been converted to the idea of the islamification of Europe. So if you aren't convinced it would be a good idea to check these out and see if your disagreement can withstand the investigative journalism being conducted.
How did things get that bad? Well I have an idea. It became possible after multiculturalist brainwashing, hate speech legislation and just general cowardice were used to put down free speech for any except these preachers of hate. Free Speech for anyone but the Kuffar. We can see that in action even now in Denmark, where the once bold norsemen prevent peaceful Demonstrations because some who disagree with it may break out
into violence. If you click the link you'll see another 910 Blog story, this one about a group in Denmark whose efforts at an anti-islamification demonstration were prevented by the nation's ministry of justice, out of concerns that thugs on the other side might take an exception to the protest and come with violence. I sent the following letter to the Ministry's head official:
You will be interested to know that the same group, SIAD, had one of its group meetings attacked by leftist thugs, where several people recieved minor injuries. The thugs were only repulsed by a handful of SIAD members, who risked being struck with thrown bottles to defend their membership, which included a number of elderly. (H/T Zonka, 910 Blog and GOV)
If this sounds familiar, its because it mirrors the street battles conducted by the Nazi and Communist parties in Weimar Germany, as they shut down participation in the political process for any parties not backed by an armed corps of thugs. Or maybe you're recalling what happens in the Palestinian territory everyday.
Of course the whole purpose of the the right to free speech is to say those things which others would seek to prevent from being said, including through violent methods. We understand why speech is restricted when it is used to call fire in a theater, or to threaten another's life, but when freedom of speech is restricted because the lives of those who speak it are threaten, or because the feeling of those to whom the speech refers are hurt, well this is insanity.
Fortunately for us Americans it is just in the European territories. right? Oh no... HRES 288.
Where is the shrieking hystrics of the the ACLU for this tacit endorsement of a religion? And while I realize its simply a non-binding resolution, its only a short step from resolution to binding law. And anyway, in many of these areas of Europe we are telling you about, its not the laws, but the policies of the government, which give rise to problems.
And of course we know why its vital to have congressional resolutions prohibiting insults to the great Abrahamic faith of Islam:
How did things get that bad? Well I have an idea. It became possible after multiculturalist brainwashing, hate speech legislation and just general cowardice were used to put down free speech for any except these preachers of hate. Free Speech for anyone but the Kuffar. We can see that in action even now in Denmark, where the once bold norsemen prevent peaceful Demonstrations because some who disagree with it may break out
into violence. If you click the link you'll see another 910 Blog story, this one about a group in Denmark whose efforts at an anti-islamification demonstration were prevented by the nation's ministry of justice, out of concerns that thugs on the other side might take an exception to the protest and come with violence. I sent the following letter to the Ministry's head official:
Dear Minister Lene Espersen, I was deeply disappointed to learn recently that a permit for a peaceful demonstration was denied SIAD (http://siad.dk/index.php) out of concerns for violent retribution from those opposed to their political message. While I am an American, and not a Dane, and therefore not one of your constituents, I would like to say that I developed a deep sense of appreciation and goodwill for your nation, after its unjust ridicule during the jyllands-posten/Muhammad Cartoon incident. Myself, and many of my fellow Americans took great care to use our buying power to purchase imported Danish goods, after some groups and nations called for an economic boycott of your country. It was a small effort, but one meant in solidarity for your country’s support for freedom of speech and
the press. The right to freedom of expression is a human right, which both your nation and mine take with the utmost seriousness. That it should be disregarded in this case is most shameful. I will admit that my interpretation in this case relies on an available english translation of the events, and should you or your office wish to elaborate on them I would be more than willing to hear your reply.
You will be interested to know that the same group, SIAD, had one of its group meetings attacked by leftist thugs, where several people recieved minor injuries. The thugs were only repulsed by a handful of SIAD members, who risked being struck with thrown bottles to defend their membership, which included a number of elderly. (H/T Zonka, 910 Blog and GOV)
If this sounds familiar, its because it mirrors the street battles conducted by the Nazi and Communist parties in Weimar Germany, as they shut down participation in the political process for any parties not backed by an armed corps of thugs. Or maybe you're recalling what happens in the Palestinian territory everyday.
Of course the whole purpose of the the right to free speech is to say those things which others would seek to prevent from being said, including through violent methods. We understand why speech is restricted when it is used to call fire in a theater, or to threaten another's life, but when freedom of speech is restricted because the lives of those who speak it are threaten, or because the feeling of those to whom the speech refers are hurt, well this is insanity.
Fortunately for us Americans it is just in the European territories. right? Oh no... HRES 288.
Where is the shrieking hystrics of the the ACLU for this tacit endorsement of a religion? And while I realize its simply a non-binding resolution, its only a short step from resolution to binding law. And anyway, in many of these areas of Europe we are telling you about, its not the laws, but the policies of the government, which give rise to problems.
And of course we know why its vital to have congressional resolutions prohibiting insults to the great Abrahamic faith of Islam:
1 Comments:
Great post. Makes me scared to think of the American media if the Democratic Party gets their way and the Fairness Doctrine comes back. I listened to an interview this morning where a democratic congressman openly said talk radio needs to be more open to other ideas. He actually said that NPR and network news has moved more to the right in recent years and the goal now is to get talk radio to do the same thing.
In 1949, when the Fairness Doctrine was first put into law, the main source of information was radio and newsprint. There was no real television. There was not blogosphere and there was no Internet. People have choice of where to get their information and the choices are increasing every day. This is an attempt to silence the one form of media that doesn’t fall into the liberal’s controls.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home