Saturday, December 18, 2010

Even elected politicians must not tell the truth about Islam in Denmark

We read:
"Here is what Jesper Langballe wrote that merited prosecution under the Danish penal code:
"Of course Lars Hedegaard should not have said that there are Muslim fathers who rape their daughters when the truth appears to be that they make do with killing their daughters (the so-called honour killings) and leave it to their uncles to rape them."

On December 3, 2010 the municipal court in Randers, Denmark found the Danish Member of Parliament Jesper Langballe (Danish People's Party) guilty of hate speech under Article 266b of the Danish penal code.

In accordance with Danish legal precedent he was denied the opportunity to prove his allegation that honour killings and sexual abuse take place in Muslim families. Under Danish jurisprudence it is immaterial whether a statement is true or untrue. All that is needed for a conviction is that somebody feels offended.

"With this article in the penal code," commented Mr. Langballe, "I must be assumed convicted in advance. I have no intention of participating in this circus. Therefore I confess."

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

Source

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Denmark? DENMARK? Does that place still exist? And if so, why?

Stucco Holmes said...

"And if so, why?"

Why not?

Anonymous said...

Despite PC pressure today, the concept of "free speech" struggles on still in the nation whose Viking ancestors went around the known world being very un-PC.
Denmark stood up well to the cartoon onslaught and should be supported by any other country that believes in free-speech.

Anonymous said...

he should file charges against every single muhammedan in Denmark because they offend them by being muhammedans...

Anonymous said...

denstan..fucking ass licking bastards.

Anonymous said...

20 VIRGINS WAITING FOR THEM... TO BAD THEIR ALL MALE !!!

Anonymous said...

It is time the the pissed off public raised a fund to underwrite the fines and legal costs imposed on public officals willing to openly criticise the court derived status quo for the faux outrage on them by bigoted judges directed by politicians who can't apply the law justly or worse those who decide to impose their own view on the world regardless of public expectation.

Obviously like most democratic counties it is time to find a new way of appointing judges than allowing politicians to do so.

I would be interested to see how many muslims have appeared in court for espousing opposite views. My bet is that the number would be zero.