Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

In dit forum kunnen we de problematiek met betrekking tot integratie en multiculturele samenleving bespreken.
Mahalingam
Berichten: 38912
Lid geworden op: Za Feb 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Mahalingam » Ma Okt 25, 2010 3:23 pm

Al eerder is er iets over deze vrouw vermeld:
http://dutch.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=13338&p=218905&hilit=Sabadits*#p218905
Een interview met Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff die in hetzelfde bootje zit als Geert en Susanne Winters voor haar.

Afbeelding

Er is nu een grote actie op touw gezet om haar te helpen. Er is geldnood. O. Delacruze schrift er over op HVV:
http://www.hetvrijevolk.com/index.php?pagina=12313
Steunoproep voor Oostenrijkse dissident
Spoiler! :
Het publiekelijk bekritiseren van de islam is in het Westen hard op weg een doodzonde te worden, net als in landen waar de Sharia heerst. Zo ook in Oostenrijk, waar Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff in haar geboorteland beschuldigd wordt van 'hate speech'. Deze misdaad zou ze begaan hebben in seminars die ze geeft over het gevaar van de islam.

Een links tijdschrift, "News", had een linkse verklikker zo'n (besloten) seminar binnengeloodst, die vervolgens aangifte deed tegen Elisabeth. Van deze aangifte werd zij voor het eerst in december vorig jaar in kennis gesteld. Uit: "Alweer een 'hate-speech' zaak in Oostenrijk":

Vroeg of laat riskeren zij die zich prominent tegen de islamisering van de samenleving uitspreken helaas de toorn van het dhimmi-establishment. Wie zich boven het maaiveld van de zelfbenoemde "elite" verheft, loopt kennelijk het risico daar door wraakzuchtige lieden weggemaaid te worden.

Dit overkomt nu ook de Oostenrijkse Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff: zij waagde het de waarheid te zeggen over de islam, en wordt nu net als Geert Wilders en anderen klemgereden met "hate-speech" wetten en geconfronteerd met gerechtelijke vervolging voor hetgeen zij heeft durven uitspreken.


Bijna een jaar alweer — terwijl het linkse tijdschrift News haar bleef besmeuren — heeft ze moeten wachten op de formele aanklacht en een rechtszaak. Maar nu is dan uiteindelijk ook die andere teerling geworpen: ze zal in komende maand voor de rechter moeten verschijnen. Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff schreef in een email:

Vandaag ben ik officieel op de hoogte gesteld dat ik zal moeten terechtstaan op 23 november. Ik heb de officiële aanklacht ontvangen, dat een soort cherry picking is uit wat ik tijdens de eerste twee (van drie) seminars gezegd zou hebben. Eén alinea bestaat uit zinnen die ik nooit uitgesproken heb, maar eerder een van de deelnemers. Toch word ik ervan beschuldigd dat gezegd te hebben (het bevat de vernietigende woorden "Adolf Hitler").

Hier een voorbeeld van één van die 'foute' uitspraken van mij: "We moeten het publiek bewust maken van het gevaar van de islam. Het onderwijs dient 'state of the art' te zijn, bijvoorbeeld mbt biologie, geschiedenis. Studenten moeten worden onderwezen over feiten. Er was ooit een Turkse belegering [in 1683] en die werd afgeslagen. Dat moet blijven [in de geschiedenis boeken]. Maar geen tolerantie voor de verheerlijking van geweld, wat betekent dat we ons van het meeste van de Koran moeten ontdoen. We moeten ons reliseren dat de Moslim Broederschap een Trojaans paard is. Turkije maakt daar deel van uit.

De sharia is een absoluut no-no. Wij willen geen sexe-apartheid, geen getto's, geen sociale en culturele discriminatie, geen polygamie, geen theocratie, geen haat ... " Dit is dus waar ik voor terecht moet staan. Dit is wat niet hardop gezegd kan worden in Oostenrijk.


Elisabeth's Voice: Een oproep

Een oproep aan de Amerikaanse blogs om te mobiliseren ter ondersteuning van Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff.

++++++
    Wij, ondergetekenden, bestaande uit vier Europese blogs, een Canadese en een Amerikaanse blog, hebben dit bericht gezamenlijk geschreven, als een openbare oproep aan onze Amerikaanse collega's om de zaak van de Oostenrijkse feministe en anti-jihad-activiste Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff op te pakken.

    Geert Wilders is onder de meeste Amerikaanse conservatieve en libertarische bloggers goed bekend, maar Elisabeth's zaak speelt niet zo op de voorgrond. Net als de heer Wilders, kijkt zij tegen een rechtszaak aan wegens het geven van feitelijke informatie over de islam. Haar "misdaad" was seminars te geven waarin ze de Islamitische doctrine beschreef, citeerde uit de Koran en haar gehoor uit de doeken deed wat zij als de gevaren van de islam beschouwt.

    Net als de heer Wilders, is Elisabeth verdacht van 'hate speech' vanwege hetgeen ze gezegd heeft. Maar in tegenstelling tot de heer Wilders, is Elisabeth slechts een gewone burger, en de moeder van een klein kind. Ze mist de ruime middelen die nodig zijn om zich te kunnen verdedigen tegen de goed gefinancierde organen van de staat die haar willen vervolgen.

    De rechtszaak tegen Elisabeth zal op 23 november in Wenen gehouden worden, in wat duidelijk een politieke actie is met als bedoeling een ieder die afwijkt van de heersende multiculturele orthodoxie het zwijgen op te leggen.

    Wij, haar Europese en Noord-Amerikaanse supporters, hebben "Elisabeth's Voice" opgericht om ervoor te zorgen zij niet tot zwijgen zal worden gebracht. Door op te roepen tot financiële steun, hopen we ervoor te zorgen dat haar verdediging voldoende gefinancierd zal kunnen worden. Met het oproepen tot publiciteit hierover, hopen we ervoor te zorgen dat haar zaak bekendheid krijgt; niet alleen in Oostenrijk en de rest van Europa, maar in de hele Westerse wereld.

    Amerikanen denken misschien dat Elisabeth's zaak een uniek Europese affaire is, en niets met hen van doen heeft. Maar vergis u daar niet in: dezelfde repressie doemt op in de Verenigde Staten van Amerika. Zoals de recente gevallen van Molly Norris, Juan Williams en Derek Fenton laten zien, kan de vrijheid van meningsuiting met niet-juridische middelen al worden weggenomen. Een afwijkende mening wordt zelfs nu al het zwijgen opgelegd in scholen en op universiteiten, en een politiek incorrecte meningsuiting kan reden voor ontslag zijn uit zowel overheidsbetrekkingen als uit private ondernemingen.

    Dezelfde soorten van 'hate speech'-wetten die in Oostenrijk tegen Elisabeth worden ingezet, worden voorbereid voor de Verenigde Staten, middels de inspanningen van de Verenigde Naties. Op initiatief van de Organisatie van de Islamitische Conferentie (OIC, waar ook Suriname lid van is), staat de VN op het punt om van alle lidstaten te vragen strafwetten aan te nemen die "de belastering van godsdiensten criminaliseren, 'waaronder' de islam." [en dat terwijl juist in de meeste OIC lidstaten geen enkele sprake is van godsdienstvrijheid, laat staan vrijheid van meningsuiting –D.]

    Uw president, Barack Hussein Obama, heeft aangegeven dat hij de voorgestelde resolutie van de VN steunt. De tijd dringt, voor ons allemaal. Als we nu niet opkomen voor mensen zoals Geert Wilders, Ezra Levant, Mark Steyn en Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, zal er later niemand meer zijn om voor ons op te komen, wanneer wij aan de beurt zijn.

Links naar meer informatie over Elisabeth's zaak vindt u onderaan dit bericht, tevens een link naar haar juridische verdedigingswebsite (waar u indien u wilt, kunt doneren ter ondersteuning van haar zaak)
++++++++

Er is een web site in het Engels met rechts boven een 'donate' knop via Paypal:
http://english.savefreespeech.org/
Exciting News:Act! For America Expresses Its Support For Elisabeth!
Op de webpage ook een groeiende lijst van deelnemers.
Wie in de Islam zijn hersens gebruikt, zal zijn hoofd moeten missen.

Gebruikersavatar
Ariel
Berichten: 71937
Lid geworden op: Wo Apr 07, 2004 10:30 pm

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Ariel » Ma Okt 25, 2010 3:30 pm

En weer moet Europa gered worden door Amerikanen.
De geest van de wijze richt zich naar rechts, maar de geest van de dwaas naar links.

Mahalingam
Berichten: 38912
Lid geworden op: Za Feb 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Mahalingam » Ma Okt 25, 2010 3:31 pm

De "Gates of Vienna"-blog gaat ook uitgebreid in op de zaak.
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2010/10/court-date-for-elisabeth-sabaditsch.html
A Court Date for Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff
Elisabeth was first notified of the possible case against her last December. For almost a year she has been waiting for a formal charge and a court date, and now the other shoe has finally dropped: she will go to court on November 23, 2010.
She just sent me this email:

    Dear Baron,

    Today I have officially been informed that I will have to stand trial on November 23.

    I have received the official charges, which are a sort of pick-and-choose of whatever I said during the first two (out of three) seminars. One paragraph consists of words that I never said, but rather those of one of the participants. But I am accused of having said them (they contain the damning words “Adolf Hitler”).

    Here is a sample of my evil words: “We need public awareness of the danger posed by Islam. Education needs to be state of the art, eg biology. History. Students need to be taught facts. There was a Turkish siege [in 1683], and they were badly beaten. That must remain [in the history books]. No tolerance for the glorification of violence! And that means we have to get rid of most of the Quran. We must realize that the Muslim Brotherhood is a Trojan horse. Turkey is part of that.

    “Sharia is an absolute no-no. We d not want any gender apartheid, no ghettos, no social and cultural discrimination, no polygamy, no theocracy, no hate...”

    This is what I’m being tried for. This is what cannot be said aloud in Austria today.

    — Elisabeth


Hier een optreden van haar:
Wie in de Islam zijn hersens gebruikt, zal zijn hoofd moeten missen.

Mahalingam
Berichten: 38912
Lid geworden op: Za Feb 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Mahalingam » Ma Okt 25, 2010 3:35 pm

Hier een interview met Engelse ondertitels:





Transcript (Engels)
Spoiler! :
00:02 Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, Geert Wilders told us yesterday
00:06 that Monday he will stand trial in the Netherlands.
00:10 The same is happening to you, you also have to stand trial.
00:14 Can you tell us the background for this?
00:17 The background of my charge is that I during the course of the past year
00:21 held a three-part seminar for a political party in Austria,
00:27 where I, referring to Quran quotes, have explained the current situation in Europe.
00:33 I quoted the Quran verbatim.
00:37 Two of these seminars were infiltrated by a journalist
00:41 from a leftist weekly magazine in Austria,
00:45 and afterwards felt I should be reported to the public prosecutor in Vienna.
00:51 The latest news is that the press knew that the case will go on trial,
00:59 before I was even informed myself. How can this happen?
01:02 This is true. The weekly knew it before me or my lawyer did,
01:08 and how this can happen today, makes us wonder. We were really surprised.
01:13 In any case, one should think that under the Rule of Law, the accused
01:17 should probably be the first to be told – in particular what charges will be brought.
01:24 That was not the case, we were really quite surprised,
01:29 and actually saddened by how the legal system abandons its citizens
01:34 and still, as things stand, still no formal charge has been presented,
01:41 as of this day, I do not know exactly what I am charged for saying
01:47 something the public persecutor and the State dislike.
01:50 I was told that it was everything I had said that was considered bad,
01:55 that this was found actionable, but no single statements,
02:00 but as mentioned, that is still not formalized,
02:03 and thus I do still not know exactly what will happen.
02:06 That I will be charged and will stand for court is certain in any case.
02:11 So, one can look at it his way: You quoted the Quran,
02:16 and were then charged with sedition – or what was the reason again?
02:20 Well, that is article § 283 b, as far as I remember´,
02:25 which means denigrating and putting down religious teachings.
02:30 So, one quotes the teachings, and is then charged for 'sedition',
02:34 but that is completely nuts, actually, right..?
02:35 Yes, completely crazy – but the way we are living today ..
02:39 it is crazy, and as I always say: Three times three is no longer considered to equal nine
02:44 and part of our work is to ensure that now as in the future, to make clear again,
02:50 that three times three remains nine, and this is what we all should work together for,
02:55 and if my part is that I have to stand for the court,
02:58 I will take that part and I will again make sure
03:02 that three times three remains nine.
03:04 Now, you are not the first person facing charges in Austria,
03:08 there was already Susanne Winter. To my knowledge she was fined € 20.000.
03:13 Are the two cases comparable, or had Susanne Winter
03:17 in her speech somehow shot much above the target?
03:21 It is not up to me to decide if Susanne Winter shot above her target.
03:26 However, the main difference between Susanne Winter and myself is,
03:30 and I do not really like to be compared with her,
03:32 that Susanne Winter is a politician. I am a mother, a feminist,
03:39 a teacher of Islam, and at the same time also a victim.
03:43 In contrast to Susanne Winter I lived in Islamic countries,
03:48 in Iraq, Iran, Kuwait and Libya, and have experienced these things,
03:52 the Quran, Shariah, teachings of Islam in my own life,
03:59 and believe that I also learned some things from that,
04:03 as people always call me a “Self-declared expert on Islam” ..
04:07 I never said that .. I never declared myself
04:10 an expert on Islam, but then, I think, when someone sits down,
04:16 studies the Quran, the hadith, the Sunnah and Shariah,
04:20 that one can actually acquire some knowledge
04:24 and as mentioned I experienced this on my own body, and well –
04:27 when people consider me a self-declared expert on Islam –
04:33 take away the 'self-declared' – I do actually know a few things.
04:37 Did you get any clues from the state prosecutor how they view the problem?
04:42 The state prosecutor must now decide how to proceed, right?
04:47 Do you think it might fizzle, or do you fear that it might end [in a trial] for you?
04:55 I believe the State has to proceed, the pressure from the multicultural system is simply too big.
05:02 The question is: Will the State get away with this?
05:07 One notices that, like, we have now seen at this demonstration,
05:12 that the people, the persons are beginning to reflect, and this is the question:
05:16 Can the State still tell its citizens: “We consider what you are doing bad”?
05:26 The citizens, I hope, as we have seen today, still more citizens come,
05:31 they are slowly saying: “We do not like what you are doing!”, and I think that this is good,
05:35 then, I believe the State has no choice but to make me face trial.
05:40 What then comes of this, well I'm quite excited to see.
05:46 I figure that there are also expenses associated with this, it is like this,
05:50 that the Islam-critical society shows solidarity. We saw it with Susanne Winter,
05:54 where for example Politically Incorrect initiated a campaign ”1 Euro for Susanne Winter”.
05:58 What can critics of Islam, be it in Germany, Austria, Switzerland,
06:02 in the entire European sphere, do to support you,
06:05 for in reality you are standing trial by proxy for all of us?
06:09 Yes, I really want to tell you this. But one thing before I explain how people can help:
06:14 This case is not about Mrs. Sabaditsch-Wolff, it is about everybody,
06:20 it is about all women, all children, all girls, and about freedom.
06:26 Also I do not take this all too personally.
06:28 It of course affects my personal life, I have expenses for my lawyer,
06:33 who, by the way, is one of the best in his field, and I cannot carry this alone
06:37 and for that reason I appeal to the solidarity of the community of Islam-critics
06:42 to support the case with one euro, two euros or five. This does not go to me personally,
06:48 the money will be deposited in a trust account in Austria,
06:51 and information about this account can soon be found on Politically Incorrect [and elsewhere],
06:57 and I really ask everyone to support me and the case.
07:02 I thank everyone in advance for any support. And would like to add
07:08 that any money that might end up being in excess on this trust account,
07:11 will not benefit me personally. Instead I have provisioned
07:15 that any excess money will go to the Citizens' Movement PAX Europa.
07:20 Wonderful. We will of course strongly support such a campaign.
07:23 We also have some kind of symbol here, I think,
07:27 The first traffic light in Germany, which is now on 'Red'.
07:32 Could we perhaps use this as a metaphor for our situation,
07:36 that we want to turn the traffic light to 'Red' for Shariah?
07:40 Actually, it should never have been permitted to show 'Green'.
07:45 We want to turn this back. And, thank God, there are still traffic lights
07:49 that switch from 'Green' over 'Yellow' to 'Red'.
07:52 Perhaps this light is not completely 'Red'.
07:55 At least 'Dark orange' is what we want,
07:59 and then at the end of the day entirely 'Red' – No to Shariah!
08:04 You are also active at OSCE, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe.
08:10 What are you experiencing there with regard to Islam, human rights, Shariah, etc. etc..?
08:17 This Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe
08:21 specifically has defending and promoting human rights as its banner cause,
08:25 and during the 70's and 80's made very significant contributions
08:29 towards pushing back Communism.
08:32 This is one of the reasons I attend OSCE,
08:37 representing the Citizens' Movement Pax Europa, for this organisation,
08:42 this international institution is not yet as subverted as the United Nations,
08:48 and I consider it a significant victory that there it was possible for me
08:53 and for the Islam-critics in general, that we one year ago in the Plenary,
08:58 a plenary session of all ambassadors, I, representing Pax Europa,
09:05 was able to quote sura 4:34 from the Quran, which actually says,
09:10 that husbands are permitted to beat their wives.
09:13 Of course this created great uproar,
09:17 and it saddened me that quite a lot of women raised their voices,
09:22 merely trying to explain that all of this really had nothing to do with Islam.
09:26 But it was clear to me – what mattered more is that once,
09:30 in the annals of the OSCE it is in there and can be found.
09:35 The next conference will take place in December, I will of course be there,
09:40 and once again I will bring up some relevant suras.

Part 2:

00:02 How does this make you feel. Also, I mean, this is like, completely irrational,
00:06 that educated women in the West close their eyes to Islam like this.
00:11 What, from your point of view, are the reasons for this?
00:14 Well, if only I know... It is me quite incomprehensible why women close their eyes,
00:20 and in particular that the mothers are closing their eyes,
00:25 in face of these really gruesome acts that women are forced to suffer in the name of Islam.
00:33 I honestly do not know, for even members of my own family,
00:39 are thinking completely different than I do, but I think it should be our common goal,
00:44 also that these women should be taught, taught and taught, that's all.
00:49 At some point it will hopefully stick that it is wrong to mutilate girls, it is wrong,
00:58 and a girl and a woman must always be respected. Not in the Islamic meaning, but in ours:
01:06 Human rights, universal human rights. Not in the sense of Islamic human rights.
01:12 Is it also that the OSCE has Islamic members creating pressure?
01:17 Of course. There is a block of Turkish representatives, Turkish diplomats,
01:25 and representatives of Turkish NGO’s. There is a group named COJEP,
01:31 who usually has a young lady sitting there wearing a heavy headscarf,
01:37 also the ambassador of Morocco is there, so yes –
01:44 there is a block attempting to … at first they were quite surprised,
01:50 that we were there at all last year, that really surprised them,
01:52 in between they became somewhat, well, unhappy that we are there,
01:58 but exactly this feeling of discontent spurs one on, to step up again,
02:03 and we will do this over and again, together with my colleagues
02:07 from the other organisations, Islam-critical organisations,
02:12 raise my voice and show the Islamic bloc that there exists another side.
02:18 Elisabeth, yesterday you also had the opportunity to meet Geert Wilders,
02:24 after the event, what can you tell us about him?
02:29 Yes, I had been looking forward like crazy to meet Geert Wilders in person,
02:32 and it was indeed possible in the short and somewhat stressful time,
02:35 to compare our pending cases, we have done that,
02:41 we will remain in contact, and will exchange information and news
02:46 about what happens. He is to face court tomorrow,
02:51 so he is somewhat ahead of me, but I am of course looking forward to
02:55 when Geert Wilders tells me how things are in the court room.
03:00 Geert Wilders is of course systematically defamed, denigrated,
03:04 for being a right wing extremist, xenophobe, right wing populist, everything ....
03:08 How have you experience as a person, meeting him directly?
03:13 Well, I was really quite impressed by him, by his calmness dealing with all these accusations,
03:22 and I must say he is in some way a model for me,
03:26 because I also try to remain calm in face of these accusations.
03:32 I know quite well who I am, and in the same way Geert Wilders knows who he is,
03:35 and he know for himself, as do I, that he is neither a right-wing populist
03:39 nor a human-despising hate preacher. Also in Austria it has been said
03:45 that I am a 'hate preacher', but one must try to return this to sender.
03:53 My friends and my fellow freedom fighters know what I stand for,
03:56 we all know what Geert Wilders stands for, and if by criticizing Islam, Geert Wilders
04:01 prevents merely a single female genital mutilation because a woman wakes up,
04:06 then it has been worth it, and then it has been worth it for me as well, absolutely.
04:09 Geert Wilders has also created the International Freedom Alliance.
04:16 What do you think is happening in Europe in particular, according to your opinion?
04:21 Well – I am deeply impressed, considering that a year ago here in
04:27 Potsdamer Platz just – was it a third? – that we could get to stand here,
04:33 when I read I the papers, when I see reactions from people I do not know,
04:41 who come to me and say: “You are right, gal, keep on going, don't let it get you down!”
04:47 Then, I have the opinion that founding the International Freedom Alliance
04:52 is simply the right thing to do, an important step in the right direction,
04:56 and I am very pleased to be part of this movement, am looking forward to the next years,
05:04 Wonderful. Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, we are keeping our fingers crossed,
05:06 we will stick together, the Islam-critics in Europe – good luck with the proceedings
05:10 and for your future work. Thank you very much!
05:13 And thank you for the interview.
Wie in de Islam zijn hersens gebruikt, zal zijn hoofd moeten missen.

Mahalingam
Berichten: 38912
Lid geworden op: Za Feb 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Mahalingam » Ma Okt 25, 2010 3:41 pm

In Brussels Journal wordt uitgelegd wat voor vuile streek de rechters hier gaan flikken.
Lawfare In Austria: Is Truth Illegal?
Ms. Sabaditsch-Wolff now faces up to a three-year prison sentence if convicted of "inciting hatred against a religious group" and "defamation of religion" in a lecture in 2009 on the "Islamization of Europe."
As allegedly criminal statements fill the indictments of "hate speech" prosecutions, as in the case with Mr. Wilders, the Dutch MP says that he has spoken the truth, and the truth cannot be illegal.
If the authorities in the states of the EU have taken note of this axiom, the Viennese state attorney has not. He has taken an even more sinister approach to prosecuting Mrs. Sabaditsch-Wolff: No statements are listed in the indictment. Instead, her entire three-part seminar has been designated as incriminating.
I am "always careful to distinguish between Muslims and Islam," Mrs. Sabaditsch-Wolff says. That, apparently, does not matter.

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/4552
De politieke dimensie is net zoals bij Wilders aanwezig (de foute politieke partij):
The three-part seminar on the "Islamization of Europe" that led to her being prosecuted, was delivered at the tax payer-funded Freedom Education Institute, an oranization attached to the Austrian Freedom Party, which had been headed by the controversial Joerg Haider until his death in 2008, and which its detractors describe as "far-Right."
Wie in de Islam zijn hersens gebruikt, zal zijn hoofd moeten missen.

Mahalingam
Berichten: 38912
Lid geworden op: Za Feb 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Mahalingam » Za Okt 30, 2010 10:39 pm

Elizabeth was ook in Amsterdam vandaag bij de demonstratie

Wie in de Islam zijn hersens gebruikt, zal zijn hoofd moeten missen.

Mahalingam
Berichten: 38912
Lid geworden op: Za Feb 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Mahalingam » Zo Okt 31, 2010 5:43 pm

Wie in de Islam zijn hersens gebruikt, zal zijn hoofd moeten missen.

Mahalingam
Berichten: 38912
Lid geworden op: Za Feb 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Mahalingam » Ma Nov 01, 2010 9:14 pm

Wie in de Islam zijn hersens gebruikt, zal zijn hoofd moeten missen.

Mahalingam
Berichten: 38912
Lid geworden op: Za Feb 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Mahalingam » Vr Nov 12, 2010 4:59 pm

Lars Hedegaard schrijft over Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

    • The indictment of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff
    EuropeNews 12 Nov 2010 By Lars Hedegaard
    (President of The Free Press Society (Denmark) and The International Free Press Society)

    An analysis from a free speech perspective

    Referring to the Austrian penal code's § 283, sections 1 and 2, the Public Prosecutor in Vienna has presented Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff (ESW) with a Strafantag (indictment) for having publicly "gegen eine in Österreich gesetzlich anerkannte Kirchen und Religionsgesellschaft, den Islam gehetzt" (i.e. for having "publicly incited hatred against a legally recognized church and religious community – Islam").

    The indictment consists of a number of quotes transcribed from two lectures given by ESW in October and November 2009. There are altogether eight hours of tape.

    I have not reviewed the tapes and therefore cannot vouch for the accuracy of the quotes adduced by the Public Prosecutor. Nor do I know whether these quotes are a fair summation of what ESW was attempting to convey.

    Interestingly, no particular statement quoted by the Public Prosecutor is singled out as especially punishable, and one must therefore assume that the Public Prosecutor considers every statement quoted (some 8000 words) to be criminal under Austrian law.

    This is very strange as the quotes fall into several categories including:

    1) Renderings of Islamic canonical teachings in the Koran and the Hadith
    2) Sociological observations on Muslim behaviour inspired by or consistent with Islamic canonical teachings
    3) Moral observations or value judgments on Islamic canonical teachings
    4) Interpretations of Islamic canonical teachings and their social and political consequences
    5) Observations on differences between Islamic and Christian teachings

    It is important to stress that nothing in the quotes indicates that ESW advocates violence, repression or discrimination against Muslims.

    Generally speaking, it must be noted that ESW's statements are well founded in the very texts that orthodox Muslims, including ulema, consider infallible and beyond discussion or interpretation. Her statements are overwhelmingly supported by empirical data and by a vast body of scholarly work by both Muslim and non-Muslim authorities.

    It is, e.g., a fact that all contemporary Muslim terrorists and advocates of jihad defend their political programme and actions with reference to Islamic canonical teachings. One would therefore assume that it is well within ESW's right of free speech to point to the very connections between Islamic teachings and Muslim behaviour that are stressed by an overwhelming number of Muslim authorities and which they consider laudable and mandated by Allah.

    To be sure, there are authors – Muslim as well as non-Muslim – that would take exception to ESW's description and interpretation of Islamic orthodoxy and her linking of Muslim behaviour to orthodox teachings.

    But such differences of interpretation or opinion should be dealt with in open public discourse where every strand of opinion may have its say. In a free society, they should not be matters for the courts to decide.

    One wonders whether the Austrian Public Prosecutor has considered the vast implications of bringing ESW's opinions before a court.

    First of all, if the court should find ESW's statements on Islamic orthodoxy and Muslim behaviour as inspired by that orthodoxy to be factually wrong or offensive, it can only mean that the court believes itself in possession of a true understanding of Islamic theology.

    If that is the case, the court owes it to the world and to Austrians who risk being convicted for their wrong opinions to clearly state what can lawfully be said of Islam and of the links between Muslim behaviour and canonical teachings.

    That would no doubt present grave problems for many imams and ulema whose understanding of Islam does not essentially differ from ESW's, but who consider this understanding to be praiseworthy and mandated by Allah, whereas ESW considers it reprehensible.

    Will the prosecutor haul these imams and ulema in front of a court for having denigrated Islam?

    And what about the Koran itself? Should that be censured because it gives a wrong, offensive and hateful impression of a peaceful and tolerant religion? The same may be asked of the Hadith, the Sira and the Tafsir.

    What is left of the Islamic canon if the court appoints itself the supreme authority on Islamic matters?

    And why single out Islam for juridical treatment? Shouldn't Christians have the same right to have Muslims convicted because their theology is in itself an affront to Christianity? As is well known, the Islamic canon considers Jesus to be a Muslim prophet who did not die on the cross and the Bible to be a distorted and falsified version of the Koran.

    But it does not stop here. One can easily imagine indictments of people who have denigrated or ridiculed true socialism, communism, liberalism, conservatism or any other body of thought.

    In conclusion, if the court convicts ESW, it will have taken a fateful step towards the abolition of free speech, freedom of thought and freedom of opinion.

    In a free society, statements – unless they incite to violence or illegal repression – should be met with statements and not with legal indictments.

    Should the Viennese court decide to convict Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, it will have put an indelible blot on Austrian jurisprudence and on Austria's reputation as a free (freiheitlich) society.

http://europenews.dk/en/node/37282
Wie in de Islam zijn hersens gebruikt, zal zijn hoofd moeten missen.

Mahalingam
Berichten: 38912
Lid geworden op: Za Feb 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Mahalingam » Zo Nov 14, 2010 12:29 am

http://www.dianawest.net/Home/tabid/36/EntryId/1579/Elisabeth-Sabaditsch-Wolff-Versus-the-State-of-Denial.aspx

Diana West schrijft over Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff.

    Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff Versus the State of Denial
    This week's syndicated column is about Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff (above), who goes to trial for "hate speech" -- i.e., speaking out against Islamization -- on November 23 in Vienna. Her website, including defense fund information, is here.

    ----

    When Barack Obama spoke in Mumbai about "the different meanings" of jihad, he set up us up again for the Big Lie: "I think," the 44th president said, sounding much like the 43rd president, "all of us recognize that this great religion in the hands of a few extremists has been distorted to justify violence toward innocent people that is never justified."

    All -- all -- of the sacred books and schools of Islam say differently. Every, single one. The fact is -- not the fantasy -- there is no distortion of Islamic texts required to justify the violence of jihad from Mumbai to Tel Aviv to New York City to Bali to Madrid and beyond.

    But we, dhimmi-citizens of an Islamizing world, are not supposed to notice the links between the violence and the faith, the faith and the law, the law and the violence -- and certainly not say so out loud. Most people don't. Increasingly, this state of denial is enforced by actual states of denial - the most recent example being Austria, which, in a trial on Nov. 23, will attempt to use "hate speech" laws to send Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff to prison for as long as three years for statements about Islam very similar to those I've just written.

    The Viennese mother and housewife originally approached the subject of Islam from her unique background that includes a childhood stint in Iran during the Islamic Revolution in 1979 when her diplomat-father was stationed there; and her own work experience with Austrian embassies in both Kuwait at the time of the Iraqi invasion in 1990, and Libya, on 9/11 ("The Jews did it!" Elisabeth's Libyan landlord shouted at her that same day).

    She studied the Islamic texts and commentaries, the apologetics and the critiques. Empowered by her natural right to free speech, she decided to educate others in her native Austria about the Koran, about Islamic law (Shariah), in seminars she offered under the auspices of the pro-Western-civilization think tank Wiener Akademikerbund (Association of Vienna Academics). Contracted by the anti-Islamization Freedom Party (FPO) in 2008, Sabaditsch-Wolff has been educating Austrians about Islam ever since.

    "The groups were very small at first, sometimes as few as five or six people" she recently told me. "Later on, the numbers rose to 35." Last fall, one attendee in particular seemed "overly enthusiastic about the topic," Elisabeth recalls. She turned out to be a journalist who would brand the seminar a "hate school" in a sensational story for NEWS, a left-wing publication.

    "It caused a huge uproar among the establishment," Elisabeth says, although now that her trial approaches Austrian media are silent. "Bishops, rabbis, politicians, all of whom had never attended any of my seminars and knew nothing of the content, were asked to weigh in and condemn me. The bishop said, `One must never speak about any religion the way Ms. Sabaditsch-Wolff did about Islam.' This was especially painful for me."

    Elisabeth's husband, a military surgeon, is very supportive of her. "My mother had to come to terms with her daughter being maligned in the media," she says. "My sister has cocooned herself and believes the NEWS story rather than confronting reality. My father, who has attended all of my seminars, knows the truth and supports me 100 percent."

    Of course, when she enters that Vienna courtroom, she will face the state alone. "The thought that the state -- a state that I love very much and that I represented proudly all my life -- is prosecuting me for thoughts is a painful one. It is hard to understand that I should have to stand trial for thoughts that are not only based on experience but are the product of careful study of the texts that make up Islam."

    But Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff is also standing trial for her courage, which threatens all states of denial. "It is interesting to note that once the topic is raised, most friends out themselves as feeling the exact same way I do, however, there is fear. They do not want to become active out of fear for losing their jobs (which is a very real possibility) or getting hurt by some Muslim wacko. My response is always, `Fear is the wrong feeling here. We need to stand up and say, No to Shariah, gender apartheid, theocracy, parallel legal systems.'

    "By the way," she adds. "I am being charged for saying all of this!"
Wie in de Islam zijn hersens gebruikt, zal zijn hoofd moeten missen.

Mahalingam
Berichten: 38912
Lid geworden op: Za Feb 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Mahalingam » Za Nov 20, 2010 11:50 pm

Op http://english.savefreespeech.org/?p=184 zal dinsdag vanaf 09:00 uur verslag gedaan worden van de rechtszaak in Oostenrijk.

Afbeelding
Wie in de Islam zijn hersens gebruikt, zal zijn hoofd moeten missen.

Mahalingam
Berichten: 38912
Lid geworden op: Za Feb 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Mahalingam » Di Nov 23, 2010 12:37 pm

Thans is de rechtszaak aan de gang. Via http://tundratabloids.com/ wordt er verslag gedaan.
De belangrijkste zaken:
1. er is pers en ATV aanwezig.
2. alle 8 uur geluidsband zullen worden afgeluisterd vanwege context.
3. de verdediging kaart aan dat diverse uitspraken niet in het openbaar gedaan zijn en dus geen onderwerp van rechtsgang.
4. getuigen die gewenst zijn: Wafa Sultan, Hans Jansen en Robert Spencer.
5. er wordt les gegeven in de 'tenants' van de Islam.

Een leuke: de uitspraak "Islam is shit" viel in een debat of je wel of niet strafbaar bent als je "Islam is shit" zegt. Dus is de kwestie: is het illegaal of strafbaar om over de legaliteit van de uitspraak "Islam is shit" te debatteren?

Aanvulling:
The proceedings had a serious breach of procedure: The journalist from NEWS.at had not been summoned as a witness, yet was permitted to take the stand. Witnesses are not permitted to be present at the hearings before they are summoned. The defence lawyer will look into possible consequences of this.
Wie in de Islam zijn hersens gebruikt, zal zijn hoofd moeten missen.

Mahalingam
Berichten: 38912
Lid geworden op: Za Feb 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Mahalingam » Za Nov 27, 2010 11:20 pm

http://vladtepesblog.com/?p=27813
De International Free Press Society hield vandaag een conferentie in Kopenhagen.
Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff sprak:

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I stand here before you in the city of Copenhagen in the year 2010. This is widely considered to be an enlightened country in the heart of an enlightened continent.

Our basic freedoms have long been guaranteed — first by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as passed by the United Nations in 1948, and then buttressed by the Council of Europe in 1950 through the European Convention of Human Rights, which was later affirmed by the European Union. Our individual countries have additionally codified the same basic rights in their own constitutions.
These rights include the freedom of individual conscience, the right to assemble peaceably, and the right to practice our religion freely, or to have no religion at all. And, perhaps most importantly of all, they include the right to voice our opinions freely and to publish them without hindrance.
Yet freedom of speech is under attack today here in Denmark, as it is in my own country Austria, and indeed all across Europe. Today, in 21st century Western Europe, our right to free speech is being shut down quietly and systematically with an effectiveness that the commissars in the old Soviet Union could only dream of.

A milestone in this ominous totalitarian trend will be reached tomorrow, 28 November 2010, when the member states of the European Union are required to implement an innocuous-sounding legal provision known as the “Framework decision on combating racism and xenophobia”, or, more fully, the “Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008 on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law.” According to the final article of the Framework Decision, “Member States shall take the necessary measures to comply with the provisions of this Framework Decision by 28 November 2010.”

Why does this matter to the cause of free speech in Europe?

If you read the full text of the Framework Decision (which may be found in the legislative section of the EU’s website), you will learn that “Each Member State shall take the measures necessary… to ensure that the following intentional conduct is punishable.” Such “intentional conduct” includes “conduct which is a pretext for directing acts against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin.”

Based on what has recently happened to Geert Wilders and me — and earlier to Gregorius Nekschot, Jussi Halla-aho, and numerous others — we can all guess who will be punished under this provision of the Framework Decision: those who criticize Islam.
Even worse, a complaint made by a member state does not have to be “dependent on a report or an accusation made by a victim of the conduct”, nor does the alleged offender have to be “physically present in its territory”.
In other words, if the dhimmi Austrian government objects to a cartoon published by Kurt Westergaard here in Denmark, Mr. Westergaard may be extradited by the Austrian Ministry of Justice to answer to hate speech charges in Austria. The European Arrest Warrant guarantees that the Danish government cannot legally interfere with such an extradition, and the 800-strong “European Gendarmerie Force” would be available to fetch Mr. Westergaard out of his bed and bring him to Vienna — with impunity.

As of tomorrow, the above scenario becomes a real possibility. It is not a paranoid fantasy. These legal provisions are detailed in the EU’s public documents, and they will enjoy the full force of law in all EU member states as of midnight tonight.

The death throes of free speech in Europe begin tomorrow morning.

As most of you already know, nearly a year ago I was made aware that “hate speech” charges might be filed against me — I had “denigrated religious teachings” by giving one of my public lectures on Islam.
The possibility of my prosecution was not communicated to me directly, but through articles in the press.
It was not until last month that a court date was set for my case. Once again, I had to discover this fact in the press — in NEWS, the same left-wing newspaper that brought the original complaint against me. I was not officially notified of my hearing date until several days later.
The evidence used against me this past week was a transcript of a tape of my lecture, provided to the court by the same socialist newspaper. It included words that were not spoken by me, and words that were not spoken in public, which therefore were not a violation of the law.

But my case is not really about the law. It is a political trial, and like the trials of Geert Wilders and Jussi Halla-aho, it is intended to silence someone who speaks out against the barbaric nature of sharia law.
Above all else, it is intended to discourage anyone who might consider following in my footsteps. The oligarchs who rule Europe are determined to prevent any frank discussion among their citizens of Islam and its legal doctrines.
These are the methods of a totalitarian state.
They are more successful than those of the Nazis and the Fascists and the Communists because they are accomplished quietly and peacefully, with no need for concentration camps or gulags or mass graves or the shot in the back of the neck in the middle of the night.
They are surgical strikes executed via our legal systems, and they are quite effective. Between the summary punishment carried out against Theo Van Gogh and the Framework Decision applied though our courts, there is no room left for us to maneuver.

We are systematically being silenced.
I admire the provisions of the First Amendment that all Americans enjoy as their birthright. Its free speech provisions will make the imposition of sharia that much more difficult in the United States.
But here in Europe we are not so well-protected. Our constitutions and the rules imposed upon us by the EU allow certain exceptions to the right to speak freely, and those little rips in the fabric of our rights are enough to tear the entire structure to pieces.
We desperately need our own version of the First Amendment. We need leaders who are wise and courageous enough to compose and implement legal instruments that affirm the same fundamental rights that are guaranteed to all citizens by the United States Constitution.
We do not yet have any leaders of this caliber. But they are beginning to appear on the scene, and one day they will be the real leaders of our individual European nations, replacing the internationalist totalitarian usurpers who oppress us today.
Our nations will be governed by their own people, by those who truly represent them. Their leaders will be true patriots, people like Jimmie Åkesson and Kent Ekeroth in Sweden, or Oskar Freysinger in Switzerland, or Geert Wilders and Martin Bosma in the Netherlands, or Filip Dewinter and Frank Vanhecke in Flanders.

We are going to reclaim our continent and our nations. We will take our countries back from those thieves who sneaked them away from us while were lulled into somnolence by our wealth and our pleasant diversions.
This will not be an easy task. Our path will be strewn with obstacles and great dangers. But we must travel it nonetheless, because if we do not, European civilization — the heart of Western Civilization — will be destroyed.
What were formerly our nations will become regions with indistinct boundaries, populated mainly by people of foreign cultures and administered by corrupt totalitarian bureaucrats. The natives — the original inhabitants, our children, the descendants of those who created the greatest civilization the world has ever known — will be reduced to curators and costumed actors in a quaint theme park.
Call it “Euro World”. Authentic cuisine, ethnic dancers, and fireworks at ten o’clock.

This is what we will face if we give up our cherished freedoms. If lose our freedom of speech, then we are lost forever.
I am not a victim. I intend to stand up for what is right. I will defend what needs to be defended. Above everything else, I will exercise my God-given right to speak freely about what is happening. Freedom of speech is the single most important freedom we possess.
I am doing this for my daughter, and for her children, for those who will have to live in the world we are now preparing for them. I am doing what our grandparents should perhaps have done during the 1930s, when their own freedoms were under threat.
This is our time. This cup will not pass from us.

I am reminded of a passage in J.R.R. Tolkien’s famous trilogy, The Lord of the Rings.
It is an exchange between Frodo the hobbit and Gandalf the wizard, and it concerns the perilous quest on which Frodo and his friends have been sent.
Frodo says: “I wish it need not have happened in my time.”
Gandalf responds: “So do I, and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.”
It is time for us to decide what to do with the time that is given us.
If I were to speak these same words tomorrow morning, I might be subject to arrest. I could be charged under the provisions of the Framework Decision, and extradited to the country that charged me using a European Arrest Warrant, escorted by the European Gendarmerie.
This is not an imaginary scenario; it is a very real possibility.
It is true that only a few people are likely to undergo such an ordeal. But it only takes a few people.

How many people have to endure what Mr. Wilders and I are enduring before everyone else gets the message?
How many examples have to be set before the rest of the European population understands the new rules, and is cowed into submission?
And we must remember to whom they will be submitting in the end. They will be submitting to our successors in Europe. They will be submitting to our replacements.
We must remember that the word for submission in Arabic is Islam.

When there are enough Muslims living in Europe — and it doesn’t have to be a majority of the population, just somewhere around fifteen or twenty percent — we will be living under Islamic law, and not the laws that presently govern us.
We will no longer enjoy what constitutional rights remain to us now. Our rights will be completely prescribed and delimited by sharia. Women will become the virtual chattel of men. Christians and Jews will be driven out or forced to convert to Islam. Atheists and homosexuals will be killed.

The European Union would consider these words to be “hate speech”. Under the Framework Decision, they would be classified as “racism and xenophobia”, and I could be prosecuted for saying them.
But they are in fact the simple truth.
Anyone can verify them by studying history. Anyone who chooses can read the Koran and the hadith and the Sunna of the Prophet.
Widely available official treatises on Islamic law confirm that my description is not “hate speech”, but a plain and accurate reading of the tenets of Islamic law.
It has become obvious that to tell the truth about Islam is now considered “incitement to religious hatred”.
It is now clear that non-Muslims who reveal the tenets of sharia law to the public are “denigrating religious teachings”.

If we meekly accept these rules, then we are acquiescing in the imposition of sharia law in our own nations. And I, for one, will not sit silently while this happens.
I don’t want my daughter to live under sharia.
Our time is short. If you and I do not envision an Islamic future for ourselves, then we must speak out now.
If we wish to preserve the right to speak and publish freely, then we must exercise it now.
I wish this need not have happened in my time. But it has.
We must make full use of the time that remains to us.

Thank you.
Wie in de Islam zijn hersens gebruikt, zal zijn hoofd moeten missen.

Mahalingam
Berichten: 38912
Lid geworden op: Za Feb 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Mahalingam » Ma Nov 29, 2010 5:17 pm

De rede is ook te bekijken en te beluisteren:
http://vimeo.com/17262291
Wie in de Islam zijn hersens gebruikt, zal zijn hoofd moeten missen.

Mahalingam
Berichten: 38912
Lid geworden op: Za Feb 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Mahalingam » Do Dec 09, 2010 8:52 pm

http://www.amsterdampost.nl/toespraak-elisabteh-sabaditsch-wolff-in-israel/
Afgelopen dinsdag 7 december hield Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff – de vrouw die in Oostenrijk in een rechtszaak is verwikkeld vanwege islamkritische uitspraken – een toespraak in Israel tijdens een bijeenkomst van de “Alliance of the European Freedom and National Parties”. Ze sprak als vertegenwoordiger van de bewegingen “Pax Europa” en “ACT! for America”
.
Kort samengevat zei mevrouw Sabaditsch-Wolff het volgende:

Geen enkele beschaving duurt eeuwig. Omdat de Westerse beschaving zich de afgelopen eeuwen voortdurend in opgaande lijn heeft ontwikkeld zijn we geneigd om te denken dat we – volgens Francis Fukuyama – “het eind van de geschiedenis” hebben bereikt.
Dat is hoogmoed van de eerste orde, vooral met het oog op de gevaren die onze beschaving zowel van binnenuit als van buitenaf bedreigen. Niet altijd even duidelijk, maar de gevaren zijn er en ze worden groter. Een beschaving kan van binnenuit sterven als ze de kernwaarden vergeet die haar eens groot maakten, als ze ophoudt te geloven in haar eigen fundamentele leerstellingen.

De oorzaken voor het verlies van de kernwaarden kan men toeschrijven aan de verschrikkingen van de twee Wereldoorlogen, de Holocaust, de wreedheden van het Communisme of de maatschappelijke zwakheid van de Socialistische Welvaartsstaat, of aan een combinatie hiervan. Maar wat ook de reden is, de Europese burgerlijke eigenwaarde is verdwenen. Daarom is de Multiculturele Ideologie dominant geworden in Europa. Daarom heeft Europa miljoenen niet aan te passen buitenlanders geïmporteerd. Daarom vernederen we onszelf tegenover de nieuwkomers en geven we toe aan elke eis die ze stellen.

De Islam is een bedreiging voor Europa omdat het hart van Europa inmiddels koud is geworden. Als het nog zou slaan, dan zou de Islam net zo min een zorg zijn als dat het honderd jaar geleden een zorg was en dan zouden miljoenen moslimimmigranten niet onder ons zijn.

Israel staat aan het front van dezelfde oorlog. Israel is omringd door barbarisme, achterlijkheid en hulpbehoevendheid, dat ons allemaal te wachten staat als we ons overgeven aan de kwade machten die de Westerse beschaving willen vernietigen. We hoeven alleen maar te kijken naar wat er de laatste vijftig jaar in Libanon is gebeurd om te zien welke toekomst een multicultureel Europa wacht.

Israel is en oase in een woestijn van barbarij. Daarom is Israel zo belangrijk in de strijd tegen de Grote Jihad. Iedereen die zich tegen islamisering verzet vindt in Israel een natuurlijke bondgenoot. Dat is geen kwestie van links of rechts. De sharia heeft geen enkel respect voor welke van onze politieke stromingen ook. Vergis u niet: de strijd tegen de sharia is een strijd om de beschaving.

Hoe de toekomst van Europa en Israel eruit ziet als de deur voor de expansionistische Islam niet wordt gesloten zien we als we nagaan wat er is overgebleven van het Zoroastische Perzië, het Boeddhistische Afghanistan of het Christelijke Syrië. Dit is wat ons te wachten staat als we NU niet handelen. Onze geweldige beschaving zal worden vervangen door armoede, despotisme en aftakeling. We kunnen onze beschaving terugvorderen als we maar de wil hebben om het te doen. Ons tijdstip is gekomen.

Spoiler! :
Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am very excited to be here in Israel, and I thank former MK Eliezer Cohen for inviting me.

The State of Israel is a modern incarnation of one of the ancient sources of today’s civilization. Our civilization — Western Civilization — traces its origins to the confluence of Judaic, Hellenic, and Roman cultures in what eventually became Christian Europe.

This civilization is now under siege, both from without, and especially from within.

I am here today to represent two defenders of our civilization, the Citizens’ Movement Pax Europa — in German, Bürgerbewegung Pax Europa and ACT! for America.

Let me tell you more about each one.

Pax Europa is a European civil rights movement and a human rights organization. Our objectives are to protect not only the democratic, free, and secular rule of law in our country, but also to struggle for European culture based on the Judeo-Christian traditions and — especially — on the values of the Enlightenment. These are the values that are currently under threat throughout the nations of the West.

In order to achieve our objectives, we offer lectures, panel discussions, and conferences. In addition, Pax Europa also participates in the OSCE human dimension. We are an independent, non-partisan movement. We clearly distance ourselves from all right-wing or left-wing extremists and all xenophobic movements. Our sole purpose is to champion the values and freedoms that form the cornerstone of our civilization. Pax Europa is the enemy of anyone who threatens those values and freedoms, and the friend of anyone who defends them.

ACT! for America is the largest national security movement in the United States. It is an issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America. We are committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam.

As an ACT! for America international chapter leader from Austria, I wanted you to know just how much a safe and secure Israel means to me and to Brigitte Gabriel, our organization’s Founder and President who was able to save her life by escaping into northern Israel from war torn Lebanon in 1982.

We value you immensely! We work and fight and pray for you. We support Israeli-made products. We are constantly promoting pro-Israel rallies in the West. We are in your corner and at your side every step of the way.

Thank God for Israel. Know that we will do anything in our power to love, respect and defend you. May God bless you!

Ladies and gentlemen,

No civilization is eternal. Because Western Civilization has been in the ascendant for the last few centuries, there is a tendency to think that what we have built is the final state at which mankind has arrived — that we have reached, as Francis Fukuyama put it, “The End of History”.

This is hubris of the highest order, especially given all the indicators of the dangers currently faced by our civilization, both from without and from within. The signs may not always be obvious, but they are there, and they are growing in number.

The death of a civilization does not come only when sand dunes drift in over the rubble of a once-proud city. The end is not necessarily marked by an invasion of barbarian hordes, or the burning and looting of our homes and businesses.

A civilization can also die from within, when it forgets the core values that once made it great, when it stops believing in its own fundamental tenets.

The disappearance of civilizational self-confidence in Europe can perhaps be traced back to the unimaginable and pointless slaughter of the First World War, or to the Holocaust and other horrors of the Second World War, or to the ravages of seventy years of Communism, or to a societal enervation imposed on the continent by the socialist welfare state — or some combination of all of these.

Whatever the reason, European civilizational self-confidence is all but gone. This is why Multiculturalism has become the dominant ideology in Europe. This is why Europeans have imported millions of unassimilable foreigners. This is why we abase ourselves to the newcomers and accede to their every demand.

Islam is a threat to Europe because the heart of European civilization has already gone cold. If it were still beating, Islam would be of no more concern than it was a century ago, and millions of Muslim immigrants would not be among us.

Those of us who still love our civilization and what it stands for are on the front lines of a new war. People such as Geert Wilders and myself are on trial for speaking out in defense of our liberties and our democracy. Others have been silenced through intimidation, ostracism, and the threat of destitution.

The oligarchs who control the European Union are determined that there shall be no dissenting with their program of abolishing the peoples of Europe and replacing them with another.

This war is a quiet one. It does not involve guns and bombs and tanks and fighter jets. No corpses litter the battlefield.

But it is just as real, and at least as important as any previous war fought on European soil. On its success or failure depends the nature of the civilization that will reside in Europe over the next century — if, indeed, there will be any successor civilization at all.

And Israel is on the front lines of the very same war. Israel is surrounded by the barbarism and backwardness and destitution that awaits us all if we continue to surrender to the evil forces that would destroy Western Civilization. We have only to look at what has happened to Lebanon over the last fifty years to see the future that awaits a modern “multicultural” Europe.

And we only have to look a few kilometers to the south of this spot to see what Israel would be like if it were not inhabited by the Jews. A satellite photograph of the Gaza Strip reveals something telling: when you move a bit south from Ashkelon, or a bit west from Sderot, the rich and productive landscape of Israel abruptly ends and the vast wasteland of Gaza begins. This wasteland extends further south into Egypt, east into Jordan, and north into Lebanon.

Israel is an oasis of civilization in a desert of barbarism.

This is why Israel is so important to the struggle against the Great Jihad. Anyone who is committed to resisting Islamization will find in Israel a natural ally.

This is not a matter of Left and Right. Sharia has no respect for any of our political parties. It does not recognize the very foundation on which our diverse political structures rest.

Make no mistake about it: the fight against sharia is a fight to save civilization itself.

To discover the future of Europe and Israel if the door is not closed against expansionist Islam, examine what remains of Zoroastrian Persia, or Buddhist Afghanistan, or Christian Syria.

This is what awaits us if we do not act now. Our great civilization will be replaced by poverty and despotism and degradation.

Our civilization is ours to reclaim if we only have the will to do it.

Our moment has come.

Thank you.

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2010/12/oasis-of-civilization-in-desert-of.html
Wie in de Islam zijn hersens gebruikt, zal zijn hoofd moeten missen.

Mahalingam
Berichten: 38912
Lid geworden op: Za Feb 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Mahalingam » Ma Dec 20, 2010 2:34 pm

Video van Elisabeth haar toespraak in Parijs op de "Assises contre l'islamisation de l'Europe" ( Konferenz gegen die Islamisierung in Europe) bijeenkomst waar de PVV het liet afweten.

Afbeelding

http://fr.sevenload.com/videos/dypMlpu-Assises-Elisabeth-Wolff

Er was ook een vaag incident met Oskar Freysinger . Hij zou iemand een mes ontfutseld hebben die ermee nare dingen wilde doen. ("Ik hield het mes in de hand. Dit wapen was bedoeld om te doden, "zei hij.)
http://www.radio-rhone.ch/fr/informations/infos-a-chaud/oskar-freysinger-evite-une-agression-au-couteau-lors-de-son-passage-a-paris-313-41482
Wie in de Islam zijn hersens gebruikt, zal zijn hoofd moeten missen.

Mahalingam
Berichten: 38912
Lid geworden op: Za Feb 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Mahalingam » Vr Jan 14, 2011 10:21 pm

Thoughts Before a Trial by Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

With just a few days remaining before the next stage of my trial, I had two interesting encounters with two quite different friends. Both kept me thinking very hard even after we parted ways.

Allison is the mother of twin girls who went to kindergarten with my daughter. Allison and her husband are liberals in the sense of “live and let live”; they have no connection with religion, any religion, and they believe that everyone should have the freedom to believe in whatever he wants, to dress in any way he wants, to eat whatever he wants. We have had many a discussion about what I do and what I believe in, and although we are friends, they have always told me that they think that what I do is wrong in the sense that I am unfairly attacking Muslims.

Allison called me the other night. We talked, and when I told her that I was sad that she and her husband had chosen the United Arab Emirates for their next vacation, she answered that I am a radical. I asked, somewhat surprised, why she thought that.

“Well, I see the hatred in your face when you see a woman in a headscarf on the street.”

“What?” I answered. “How can you tell? Can you read my mind?”

In any case, I do not hate people, but I criticize the ideology that forces women to cover up, that takes away a woman’s right to choose her life and her destiny, an ideology that enslaves women. I inform people about the contents of the Quran and am thus a hate preacher. Or, in other words, by teaching the Quran I am preaching hate. And people listening to me will feel hatred.

“But you also hate the woman, I can see that,” she replied.

I then told her the following: “Allison, once again: how do you know that? Can you read my thoughts? Furthermore, your belief in ‘live and let live’ can only work if everyone adheres to it. But Islam does not call for ‘live and let live’. In any case, you are actually saying what the prosecutor is saying, that this woman hates Muslims, hates Islam, incites other people to hate Muslims by feeling hatred towards Muslims. You should be hoping for a guilty verdict, because you believe you know what I feel.”

She was shocked. Apparently I had nailed her. “No, not at all. I want to you to win, with all my heart. You need to win.”

“But you’re saying something very different, Allison.”

“Well, actually I want you to win for your daughter’s sake.”

Note that she didn’t say: I want you to win because you’re right. Or: You have the right to your opinions, even though I may not agree with them. No, she said: For your daughter’s sake.

“I want you to win because your daughter should not have to deal with a mother who was found guilty in court. She won’t understand it.”

We then decided to change the subject, but afterwards the conversation continued to linger in my mind. What had happened here? Was I wrong? And still, I can only repeat myself for the umpteenth time that I do not hate Muslims (as a matter of fact, I do not hate, period), but liberals do not believe people like me. No matter what I say or do, it seems they are projecting their own bigotries upon me. I am merely holding up a mirror. What they see is not my — non-existent — hatred, but their own.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The next day I met my neighbor and friend Samantha. During our neighborly small talk I told her that I was busy preparing for my case, and this prompted her to say in a near-whisper, “You know, I have been following your case, and though I wasn’t always so sure about what you stood for I can tell you now that I think you’re spot on. I admire you. I do not have the courage to do what you are doing, but you are doing the right thing. I also tell my friends that I think you are right and you need to be supported. They criticized you heavily before, but they are also starting to understand.”

Not only did Samantha’s words move me to tears, but I was amazed at her honesty in admitting that she had actually studied my words and found them to be the truth. And this is what I hope the court will also conclude after careful study of my arguments. One may not agree with my statements, but they are still true. No matter how painful the truth may be, it must remain what it is: the truth.

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2011/01/esw-thoughts-before-trial.html
Wie in de Islam zijn hersens gebruikt, zal zijn hoofd moeten missen.

Mahalingam
Berichten: 38912
Lid geworden op: Za Feb 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Mahalingam » Ma Jan 17, 2011 2:53 pm

http://www.amsterdampost.nl/tien-vragen-aan-elisabeth-sabaditsch-wolff
Een vertaling door E.J. Bron.
Tien vragen aan Elisabeth Sabaditsch Wolff

Afbeelding
Wie in de Islam zijn hersens gebruikt, zal zijn hoofd moeten missen.

Mahalingam
Berichten: 38912
Lid geworden op: Za Feb 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Mahalingam » Wo Jan 19, 2011 11:06 pm

Verslag van het proces tot nu toe is te vinden bij
http://tundratabloids.com/2011/01/the-state-of-austria-vs-elisabeth-sabaditsch-wolff-part-ii.html
THE STATE OF AUSTRIA VS. ELISABETH SABADITSCH-WOLFF PART II…….
[...]11:00 Next mentioned is Taqiyya – the permission and/or obligation to lie towards non-Muslims when doing so will further the cause of Islam. Quran, Bukhari and Muslim scriptural references are given for this. Also described in detailed in Reliance of the Traveller chapter 8.

Dr. Rami interrupts, asking for a clarification of the relevance of this passage. There seems to be a difference from the transcript. PowerPoint presentations are brought out to clarify.

The religious sanctioned lying is difficult for our politicians to handle. It is not clearly described in the Quran, is mainly based on Hadith, drawn on Muhammads’ tactics against his enemies.

Some discusssion with the audience follows. References are made to a variety of Quran verses, and the principle of abrogation in Islam.[...]

Dr. Rami interrupts to point out that the quiet, factual tone of the seminar demonstrates that this is not hate speech, but an educational setting going through relevant documentation.

NOTE. The judge has introduced a new point: discrimination of religious beliefs, the lawyer was not prepared for this point to be raised. That’s why the trial is over for now, with it being scheduled to resume on Feb 15.

Ik hoop nog wat meer te weten te komen over dit laatste. Het komt raar op mij over.
Wie in de Islam zijn hersens gebruikt, zal zijn hoofd moeten missen.

Gebruikersavatar
Manon
Berichten: 17473
Lid geworden op: Ma Feb 17, 2003 9:58 am

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Manon » Do Jan 20, 2011 9:01 am

discrimination of religious beliefs


zou dat slaan op "onthoofd al de ongelovigen" of zoiets?
More diversity always means "less white people"
Diversity is a codeword for white genocide.

Mahalingam
Berichten: 38912
Lid geworden op: Za Feb 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Mahalingam » Za Feb 05, 2011 8:36 pm

En wie was er ook op de demo in Luton van de EDL?
Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff .
Hier is haar tekst:
Ladies and gentlemen,

I am delighted to be here in Luton, the birthplace of the English Defence League.

Native Lutonians are living at Ground Zero of the attempted Islamic takeover of England. Your resistance is an inspiration to everyone in the European Counterjihad. It is a privilege to have been invited to this historic event.

As most of you know, I have been charged with hate speech in Austria, and my trial is currently underway.

What were the charges against me?

The original charge was “incitement to hatred”. On the second day of my trial, the judge at her own discretion added a second charge, “denigration of religious beliefs of a legally recognized religion.”

Guess which religion that was?

The second charge is a more serious one, and makes it more likely that I will be convicted.

Those were the charges. Now, what was my crime?

My “crime”, ladies and gentlemen, was to tell the truth about Islam. To quote the Koran and the hadith. To cite the official texts of sharia. To explain that Islam tells men to beat their wives, and that sharia requires the amputation of limbs for theft.

In my seminars I explained that Islamic law sanctions the mutilation of the genitals of little girls. It demands that anyone who leaves Islam be killed.

In short, my “crime” was to educate my fellow Austrians about what Islam really means, as prescribed by Islam itself.

Telling the plain truth about Islam in its own words insults Muslims. How bizarre is that?

Spoiler! :
The EDL’s mission statement describes it as a “human rights organisation”. Its primary goal is to restore the civil rights of ordinary English citizens. In recent years these rights have been systematically eroded by the tyrannical multicultural ideology of the state. Islam would not have been able to establish its oppressive presence in England if the civil rights of Englishmen had not already been taken away.


I share your concern with human rights. If we do not reclaim our basic rights — including the most important right of all, the right to speak freely — our civilization will be destroyed. All of our great institutions, including democracy and the rule of law, are made possible by the fundamental human rights that we all used to take for granted.

These rights are now being deliberately destroyed. The legal case against me is evidence of that fact, and so are the cases against Tommy Robinson, Guramit Singh, Geert Wilders, Lars Hedegaard, and all the other brave people who have spoken out against Islam and then been prosecuted for it.

The rights which are being taken away from us are our God-given rights. They were not granted to us by our governments.

People here in England are very fortunate, because their rights were firmly established long ago. For many centuries Englishmen have claimed — and successfully fought for — the rights of free speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of conscience, and all the other rights that were eventually identified as universal.

It is not the same in my country. We Viennese have a proud history, first as the seat of the Holy Roman Empire, and later as the capital of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. But, sad to say, universal human rights came late to Austria, and their roots are shallow. Not only that, the Austrian Empire was the prototype for the modern multicultural state, with its patchwork of ethnicities and official languages.

To make matters worse, in 1912, when Bosnia was incorporated into the Austro-Hungarian empire, my country recognized Islam as an official state religion. The law establishing Islam in Austria is the very same law under which I am being prosecuted.

So the right to free speech in Austria is neither deeply rooted nor greatly respected. But this is not the case in England.

Any Englishman who asserts his right to free speech is not breaking new ground. He is reclaiming what has already been his for centuries. The rights of free speech, free assembly, and self-government are among the “ancient liberties” of Englishmen. Any government that interferes with those liberties is tyrannical and illegitimate.

It’s worth remembering that your cousins in the American colonies rebelled against King George III because he usurped those very same rights. The colonists who formed the United States of America began by demanding their ancient liberties as Englishmen.

This is what we all must do. In these degraded and perilous times, we must stand up and reclaim our ancient liberties.

This is why I support the EDL. I stand behind any group that resists Islamization by peacefully invoking its right to speak freely about the evils of Islam.

I was prosecuted for informing ordinary people about the reality of Islam. Educating our own people is our most effective strategy to use against sharia.

For that reason, I advise you not to burn the Koran, but to read it. Only by studying what Islam stands for will we learn how to face it down.

Know your enemy. We do not fight him with knives or guns, but with the pen, the microphone, the video camera, and the printing press. Understanding what Islam means is our greatest weapon in the struggle against it. We do not need any intimidation or bullying, because the truth is on our side.

Samuel Johnson once said, “Courage is the greatest of all virtues, because if you haven’t courage, you may not have an opportunity to use any of the others.”

In the deadly times that lie ahead, courage will be required of ordinary men and women who refuse to submit to the tyranny of Islamization. Hate-speech prosecutions and shotgun attacks are only a mild foretaste of what is in store for us.

Col. Allen West, one of the most stalwart soldiers of the Counterjihad, always signs his emails with the words “steadfast and loyal”. We too must remain steadfast and loyal to one another in the coming struggle.

Never give up. Never give in.

We will never surrender!

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2011/02/elisabeth-sabaditsch-wolff-in-luton.html
Hier video:

Wie in de Islam zijn hersens gebruikt, zal zijn hoofd moeten missen.

Mahalingam
Berichten: 38912
Lid geworden op: Za Feb 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Mahalingam » Di Feb 15, 2011 11:46 pm

Het was de derde en laatste dag van het proces. Tijd tijd van rechtspreken was aangebroken.
Heet van de naald: (5:43 )
http://www.hetvrijevolk.com/index.php?pagina=12837

v Op het punt “aanzetten tot haat” luidde het vonnis: Niet Schuldig

v Op het punt “belastering van de religieuze overtuiging van een wettelijk erkend geloof” werd Elisabeth Schuldig verklaard. Ze kreeg een boete van € 480.

De rechter merkte op dat Aisha 18 jaar was toen Mohammed overleed… dit is een vaststaand feit. Maar omdat hij niet van haar scheidde toen ze de volwassen leeftijd bereikte, impliceert dit dat HIJ GÉÉN PEDOFIEL WAS.

De rechter oordeelde dat er geen sprake was van pedofilie, omdat Mohammed geen uitgesproken voorkeur had voor minderjarige meisjes. Hij koos elke willekeurige vrouw die hij krijgen kon. Dit houdt in dat kinderhuwelijken, die zo vaak voorkomen in fundamentalistische islamitische landen, ook volgens de wet NIET als “pedofilie” kunnen worden beschouwd.

Elisabeth antwoordde hierop: “Dit is een droevige dag voor mijn dochter en alle andere meisjes”.

Veroordeeld worden wegens uitspraken tegen seks met minderjarigen. Hoe kan dat?

Omdat Elisabeth erbij bleef dat seks met minderjarigen pedofilie is, is ze schuldig aan het belasteren van een religieuze overtuiging.

Nou ja, dat zegt genoeg over wat we van de islam moeten weten, nietwaar?

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2011/02/trial-of-elisabeth-sabaditsch-wolff-day.html
Verdere soundbites uit de rechtszaak:
Judge:
    The integration of Muslims is surely a question of particular public interest — you are allowed to be critical — but not incitement of hatred
    [judge states the permitted utterances]
    The language used in he seminars were not inciting hatred, but the utterances regarding Muhammad and paedophilia were punishable.
    "Paedophilia" is factually incorrect, since paedophilia is a sexual preference which solely or mainly is directed towards children. This does not apply to Mohammad. He was still married to Aisha when she was 18.
    Did you understand the sentence?
[discontent in court]

Dat weten we dan weer. We mogen zeggen dat Moh alles neukte wat los en vast was maar omdat die niet speciaal viel op kindertjes vanaf 9 jaar is die geen pedo. Hem zo benoemen is beledigend.
Wie in de Islam zijn hersens gebruikt, zal zijn hoofd moeten missen.

naar boven
Berichten: 5054
Lid geworden op: Do Nov 16, 2006 10:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor naar boven » Wo Feb 16, 2011 12:16 am

De rechter merkte op dat Aisha 18 jaar was toen Mohammed overleed… dit is een vaststaand feit. Maar omdat hij niet van haar scheidde toen ze de volwassen leeftijd bereikte, impliceert dit dat HIJ GÉÉN PEDOFIEL WAS.

De rechter oordeelde dat er geen sprake was van pedofilie, omdat Mohammed geen uitgesproken voorkeur had voor minderjarige meisjes. Hij koos elke willekeurige vrouw die hij krijgen kon. Dit houdt in dat kinderhuwelijken, die zo vaak voorkomen in fundamentalistische islamitische landen, ook volgens de wet NIET als “pedofilie” kunnen worden beschouwd.

Een opmerkelijk verschil met de zaak Wilders. De benadering van de Oostenrijkse rechtbank is staat diametraal tegenover die van het Nederlandse Openbaar Ministerie. Het Nederlandse OM acht het niet van belang of de uitspraken van Wilders conform de waarheid zijn: de uitspraken van Wilders werden getoetst op strafbaarheid wegens discriminatie, groepsbelediging of aanzet tot haat tegen bevolkingsgroepen. De Oostenrijkse rechtbank neemt het waarheidsgehalte van de uitspraken van Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff juist als uitgangspunt voor de beoordeling op strafbaarheid. Het opvatting van de rechtbank dat Mohammed geen pedofiel was, is - hoe merkwaardig de redenatie die de rechtbank tot 'de' waarheid heeft gebracht ook mag zijn - wel de waarheid. Juist of onjuist, aangenomen mag worden dat de rechtbank oprecht gelooft dat het de waarheid is en op die grond heeft de rechtbank Elisabeth veroordeeld wegens “belastering van de religieuze overtuiging van een wettelijk erkend geloof”. Met andere woorden: als de rechtbank had geredeneerd dat Mohammed wél een pedofiel was, dan was Elisabeth vrijgesproken. Het spreken van de waarheid kan in Oostenrijk dus geen laster zijn, hoe beledigend de uitspraak ook mag zijn voor een bevolkingsgroep. In Nederland is een uitspraak die beledigend is voor een bevolkingsgroep niet strafbaar en het beledigen van een bevolkingsgroep wél. In Oostenrijk wordt de religieuze overtuiging van een groep beschermd, in Nederland wordt de bevolkingsgroep met een bepaalde religieuze overtuiging beschermd.

Hoewel.
Er is toch is iets vreemds aan de Oostenrijkse rechtsspraak.

Een andere Oostenrijkse, Suzanne Winter (FPÖ), werd - in hoger beroep - ook veroordeeld. Omdat ze, onder andere, had gezegd dat Mohammed in het huidige rechtssysteem een kinderverkrachter zou zijn geweest. Maar voor een identieke uitspraak werd Suzanne Winter niet vervolgd omdat ze die uitspraak voldoende beargumenteerd had. Op dat moment gaat het dus blijkbaar niet om de waarheid..

Urteil gegen Susanne Winter bestätigt

Strafausmaß bleibt aufrecht
Winter war im Jänner zu einer Geldstrafe von 24.000 Euro und einer bedingten Freiheitsstrafe von drei Monaten verurteilt worden. Dieses Strafausmaß wurde vom Berufungsgericht am Mittwoch bestätigt. Zwei der vier "strafgebenden Fakten" wurden jedoch fallengelassen.

Unter anderem wurde Winter zwar wegen ihrer Aussage, wonach der Prophet Mohammed nach heutigem Recht ein "Kinderschänder" sei, verurteilt. Eine ähnlich lautende Aussage in einer Postwurfsendung im Grazer Gemeinderatswahlkampf wurde vom Richtersenat aber nicht beanstandet. In dieser Postwurfsendung habe Winter ihre Vorwürfe ausreichend argumentiert und daher die religiöse Ehre nicht verletzt, hieß es.
http://steiermark.orf.at/stories/369117/
RTFM

Mahalingam
Berichten: 38912
Lid geworden op: Za Feb 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Mahalingam » Do Feb 17, 2011 1:39 am

Dankbrief van Elizabeth:
http://english.savefreespeech.org/?p=336

Dear Friends and Supporters,

Yesterday was a crucial day in our fight against the Islamization of Europe and for the future of our civilization. As most of you know, I was acquitted of the charge of hate speech, but found guilty of denigrating religious teachings of a legally recognized religion. I am sure that you also know that this religion is Islam.

I can tell you that I am shaken to the core; not so much about the guilty verdict — that was a given from the start — but about the judge’s explanation for the verdict. These have been discussed elsewhere, so I will not go into them, but suffice it to say that it was indeed a dark day for young girls in Austria. What shocks me most, however, is that the judge is a woman who should know better. The reasoning used in her judgment is despicable, and a slap in the face for every woman and girl, from every race, religion, or nationality.

Marrying and molesting a child is not to be tolerated, not in the 6th century, not in the 16th century, and definitely not in the 21st century. One would expect a woman, let along a judge, to know this. But the future and the appeals court will hopefully show that this judgment is morally and factually wrong.

Since the curtain has now fallen on the first act of this tragedy, I now want to do a round of thanks. I am indebted to so many people from all over the world, and I will try to do my best to mention most of them here.

First and foremost, I want to honor the Counterjihad Collective, especially Baron Bodissey of Gates of Vienna. Without the tireless and selfless effort of these fine people, all of whom I am privileged to call friends, my case would have remained what it currently is in the MSM: ignored, at best vilified. It is amazing for me to see the results of this fine-tuned effort on a daily basis.

Imagine the following: My lawyer sends me a document regarding my case; I in turn send it to the German-English translator JLH, who in no time returns the translation to me. Baron Bodissey edits and posts on Gates of Vienna. Once the document is published, other translators grab the post and disseminate it in their blogs; other English language bloggers publish on their blogs.

If I am interviewed on camera, Vlad Tepes and KitmanTV are on hand to youtube these reports, and Baron Bodissey is on hand to post. Transcribers are called to action, with translators, to subtitle if needed.

The result is without a doubt the most comprehensive reporting about Counterjihad activities currently available. The MSM are not doing their jobs, we are. And we should be proud of this achievement. A big Thank You to all involved in this.

Second, I want to thank my family and friends for their support in these hard times. On many an evening was I cranky after having spent more than ten hours poring over the Quran, the Hadith, and The Reliance of the Traveller. You all know just how horrible the contents of these books are, and I can now tell you that studying Islamic texts can affect your psyche. I want to honor my daughter, who was more than patient when Mommy had an important Skype call to discuss some point raised by my lawyer.

Which brings me to my brilliant legal team. Dr. Rami and Mr. Strobl have been thrown into the cold water of Islamic doctrine. In little more than a year, they both became more knowledgeable in Islamic teachings than the majority of the population. They are now aware of the teachings of the Koran, they now know all about the sharia and its implications on our free society. And they did a marvelous job defending me and Western civilization. Thank you.

Heartfelt thanks and appreciation are also more than due to my supporters, be they politicians, bloggers, donors, and those who comment in those blogs and newspaper forums, whether you are from Europe, the United States, Canada or Australia.

Thank you, Geert Wilders, Rene Stadtkewitz, Kent Ekeroth, and Heinz-Christian Strache for repeatedly bringing up my case. Those political parties who so far have not understood the ramifications of this case will be judged by history.

Thank you also to the Wiener Akademikerbund, ACT! for America, Citizens’ Movement Pax Europa, The English Defense League, Riposte Laïque, and all other organizations that support me and continue to support me so generously. Without you I could not have gone through with this.

Thank you to the numerous well-wishers and supporters who have written to me in the past hours and days, or have written thoughtful comments about yesterday’s outcome.

I want to present two representative examples here:

One man from Koblenz:

As an ex-Muslim from Iran I want to wish you all the best and would like to support you if possible.

I also want to wish lots of strength and endurance in your fight against mafia called politics and law, which is controlled by the political left.

It is people like you who were in the resistance during the Nazi era, instead of swimming like dead fish in a stream of conformism and shutting up.

I hope that your appeal will be transferred to a judge who is still sane and who doesn’t retroactively legalize child abuse like the previous actor-judge.


Another comment:

What was the EU-framework decision combating anti-discrimination all about?
“No one may be discriminated against because of their (amongst others) beliefs.
Ah, yes, right. Do not discriminate. But indicting and charging one is allowed.

This is disgusting.

From the bottom of my heart I want the judge to experience what it means to live under Sharia law, especially if she has children. When the first “cultural enricher” rapes her daughter for the first time I suggest she read a few Koran suras to her daughter to comfort her.


Finally, please continue your support in whatever way you can. This is about all of you as much as it is about me. This is about our future.

Never give up.

Never give in.

Never surrender.
Wie in de Islam zijn hersens gebruikt, zal zijn hoofd moeten missen.

Gebruikersavatar
Manon
Berichten: 17473
Lid geworden op: Ma Feb 17, 2003 9:58 am

Re: Het proces: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Berichtdoor Manon » Do Feb 17, 2011 10:13 am

Heb ik nu goed begrepen dat indien iemand buiten sexueel contact met kinderen ook nog een vrouw heeft en/of sexuele contacten met volwassen vrouwen, deze géén pedofiel is, en dus ook géén pedofiele daden stelt?

[c045.gif]

Dutroux was dus géén pedofiel want gehuwd?
Interessante redering.
More diversity always means "less white people"
Diversity is a codeword for white genocide.


Terug naar “Samenleving & Integratie”

Wie is er online

Gebruikers op dit forum: Geen geregistreerde gebruikers en 5 gasten