Elizabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff is an Austrian journalist who is being criminally charged in her native Austria for defamatory speech (against Islam). She recently gave a speech on the topic of free speech at a conference in Copenhagen. I am cross-posting this from Vlad Tepes blog.
http://vladtepesblog.com/?p=27813#more-27813
So now the EU is drafting legislation to crack down on free speech. As Ms Sabaditsch-Wolff points out, Europeans do not have a First Amendment. Thus, anything they say which could be construed as criticism of Islam would be subject to criminal prosecution. Is it any wonder Europeans are afraid to even mention the words, "Muslim" or "Islam"? Here is the wording of the EU Framework Decision on Combating Racism and Xenophobia. Read it carefully. It may seem good on the surface, but it is dangerously broad.
http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/justice_freedom_security/combating_discrimination/l33178_en.htm
Of course, one must make a distinction between hate speech-still protected under US laws- and an open and honest discussion of what Islamization and shariah law mean for Europeans. That discussion of Islam should not take the form of incriminating an entire people and should not be an incitement to violence or discrimination. However, it is a legitimate issue of public interest both here and in Europe. There must be a way for Europeans to express their concern about what is happening in their countries without being subjected to prosecution-not only in their own nations, but in any other member nation that takes exception to their speech.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I don't have much confidence in any of the so-called "leaders" she praises, particularly not Geert Wilders, but I always appreciate someone who recognized the strength and value of the First Amendment. Europe is indeed wandering in the wilderness trying to establish democracy without it.
P.S. For anyone bored by the response here, this same post by Gary touched off a wide-ranging firestorm at
http://aleksandreia.wordpress.com
It wasn't an "everyone jump on the token conservative" kind of response either.
redshnel?
Red Schnell?
What Siarlys is trying to say is that this post on that other website unleased a torrent of psuedo-intellectual psycho-babble that has all but degenerated into a discussion of the Cambodian influence on German literature-including a defense of Hitler apologist David Irving by one contributor who has made numerous anti-Semitic remarks to me in past exchanges. I'll try and remember to check back in in a few days to see what else has been said.
In Hollywood, they say there is no such thing as bad publicity. I mentioned myself that the whole discussion seemed to have wandered off on several tangents, but there were some good points made.
I know, there is a guy who comments who is still cheering for an independent Sudetenland, and wishing Ernst Rohm hadn't been taken down in the Night of the Long Knives, but he's not widely admired. You should be there MORE often to keep things on track.
Post a Comment