Geert Wilders on Trial for hate speech - closing argument

[icehorse]

I don't have numbers, but it doesn't change the fact that Islam isn't the only religion with violent radicals. Or that it is not religion alone that causes terrorism, but politics and economic issues.

Does belief in Sharia come from politics and the economy?

 

[loverofhumanity]

I'm talking about the nature of Islam itself, once it reaches a large enough number it is very difficult if not impossible for it to get along with indigenous cultures. This has been glaringly obvious all through history, and no it's not the fault of 'white people'. Given even more power eventually Islamic cultures believe other cultures cannot be allowed to exist, since they are an affront to the truth which is al Islam.

The contexts are irrelevant here because Islam believes it is the eternal truth. There is no context, Islam IS the context.

You claim anyone who speaks against Islam is full of hate. To me that sounds like someone saying anyone who is against white supremacy is full of hate.

What do you mean by the 'nature of Islam'? What do you know about Islam? Have you read the Quran? Have you lived in a Muslim country or spent significant time with Muslims? How many Muslims do you know?

Where do you get your information about Islam from?

 

[icehorse]

What do you know about Islam?

What do YOU know about Islam? Have YOU read the Quran? Do you know its history? Do you know the widespread beliefs of its current adherents?

 

[loverofhumanity]

What do YOU know about Islam? Have YOU read the Quran? Do you know its history? Do you know the widespread beliefs of its current adherents?

I was asking in a good spirit not being sarcastic because I have studied Islam for 40 years and also studied the Quran for that time and Islam.

I have best friends from Islamic countries and know their culture and religion and practices and cultures well and they are wonderful people with a fantastic culture.

That's why i was asking you what you mean by the 'nature of Islam' because Islam is different the world over.

 

[MD]

What do you mean by the 'nature of Islam'? What do you know about Islam? Have you read the Quran? Have you lived in a Muslim country or spent significant time with Muslims? How many Muslims do you know?

Where do you get your information about Islam from?

I have read the Quran and the Hadith. I have lived in a Muslim country, a devout one in fact. I grew up around Muslims. At the moment I know at least half a dozen Muslims, they're good people and pretty liberal. Many are non practicing or agnostic. I have also studied Islamic history, specifically that of the Abassids, Safavids and Qajars. I've also skimmed over the history of the Mughals in India.

I get the information from my own personal life, from the people I've met, from history and from the Quran. I also know a lot of what happens in certain Islamic countries if you question. If you show dissent.

How many ex Muslims do you know? How many minorities do you know in Muslim countries? How many people do you know who come from autocratic Islamic states? How many people do you know that have suffered under autocratic Islamic states?

In my posts I am referring to mainstream Islam, which is part religion/part socio-political movement, not Sufi sects and Ismailis. If the majority of Muslims lived like the latter groups, the world would be extremely different.

 

[loverofhumanity]

I have read the Quran and the Hadith. I have lived in a Muslim country, a devout one in fact. I grew up around Muslims. At the moment I know at least half a dozen Muslims, they're good people and pretty liberal. Many are non practicing or agnostic. I have also studied Islamic history, specifically that of the Abassids, Safavids and Qajars. I've also skimmed over the history of the Mughals in India.

I get the information from my own personal life, from the people I've met, from history and from the Quran. I also know a lot of what happens in certain Islamic countries if you question. If you show dissent.

How many ex Muslims do you know? How many minorities do you know in Muslim countries? How many people do you know who come from autocratic Islamic states? How many people do you know that have suffered under autocratic Islamic states?

In my posts I am referring to mainstream Islam, which is part religion/part socio-political movement, not Sufi sects and Ismailis. If the majority of Muslims lived like the latter groups, the world would be extremely different.

The people I know are the most oppressed religions minority in the world, the Baha'is and I am aware of all the atrocities committed against them. But you ask the Bahais and not one of them will tell you that Islam is the cause of terrorism or their own oppression and of all people they know as it is them who are killed, tortured, imprisoned, their cemeteries vandalized, their shops closed, entry into universities refused.

Yet they fully uphold and defend the truth of Muhammad and the Quran because they know that Islam has nothing to do with their persecution. It's always the government or corrupt religious leaders who use their position to hurt the Baha'is because of jealousy or fear that all Iran will become Bahá'í.

These corrupt leaders who promote terrorism use Islam and the Quran as an umbrella because people believe everything their priests say and do not question.

Things like the Inquisition were abominable where heresy was rewarded with burning at the stake if found guilty. So Christianity had its beheadings and burnings and yet the Bible is still seen as Holy and Good despite verses like these which have no equal in the Quran. Why? Because people asked questions and the corrupt will kill and destroy once they are found out.

Verses in the Bible are very violent too but they were given for that time just like the Quran was for 1400 years ago not now.

1 Samuel 15:3

Now go and completely destroy the entire Amalekite nation--men, women, children, babies, cattle, sheep, goats, camels, and donkeys."

My point is every civilization has gone through periods of violence. Hitler wasn't Muslim and we westerners who used to pride ourselves on our Christian love had no qualms disfiguring innocent civilians of Hiroshima and Nagasaki or the Vietnamese with Agent Orange.

Man has committed atrocities throughout his history. It's been the nature of man to be prone to settling things by violence.

I don't blame Islam or the Quran for terrorism just like I don't blame the Bible and Christ for the inquisition and there are terrible verses in the Bible that were used to incite violence in the Crusades such as

Psalm 137:9

Happy is the one who takes your babies and smashes them against the rocks!

And many others and at the siege of Jerusalem in 1099 they did such things.

If we're going to blame anyone I would blame corrupt leaders of any age or religion or political aspiration as it is those with power that are the instigators.

The ordinary Christian or Muslim are no danger to anyone and Hitler proved that one does not need to be inspired by a Holy Book to kill by the millions. For he had no Quran and wasn't it nearly 7 million he massacred? And Stalin?

People blindly following without questioning another's motive is what is dangerous. Whether it's Hitler or Obama or ISIS the followers blindly obey without questioning and that is the problem.

People who stop and question and think will see clearly both the Bible and Quran do not promote evil.

 

[Koldo]

I must have a very unpopular opinion since I haven't read anyone, so far, say anything similar to what I am going to say...

As I see it, immigrants are guests that were allowed to settle. As such, the government should be allowed to withdraw this permission at any time it wishes to do so for any reason whatsoever.

 

[loverofhumanity]

I must have a very unpopular opinion since I haven't read anyone, so far, say anything similar to what I am going to say...

As I see it, immigrants are guests that were allowed to settle. As such, the government should be allowed to withdraw this permission at any time it wishes to do so for any reason whatsoever.

If the immigrants aren't keeping their pledges that they made then of course they can be sent home.

 

[Didachist]

Geert Wilders is a Dutch politician who is openly against the Islamification of the Netherlands and the west in general. At a political rally in 2014 this exchange occurred:



Largely due to this exchange he has been on trial for hate speech and racism. Here is his closing argument:

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9404/wilders-trial-closing-statement

Anyone here think Geert should be convicted?

Yes, but not for what you think, I believe he should be as Holland does not have free speech.

Let that be a lesson to the dutch to take power back from their constitution and their legislature.

 

[icehorse]

Yes, but not for what you think, I believe he should be as Holland does not have free speech.

Let that be a lesson to the dutch to take power back from their constitution and their legislature.

Well that's interesting. My understanding is that free speech isn't absolute anywhere, it exists to varying degrees. Can you say more about the details of free speech in the Netherlands? It certainly seems that Wilders thinks his rights have been infringed upon.

 

[Didachist]

Well that's interesting. My understanding is that free speech isn't absolute anywhere, it exists to varying degrees. Can you say more about the details of free speech in the Netherlands? It certainly seems that Wilders thinks his rights have been infringed upon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_by_country#The_Netherlands

Article 7 of the Dutch Grondwet in its first paragraph grants everybody the right to make public ideas and feelings by printing them without prior censorship, but not exonerating the author from his liabilities under the law. The second paragraph says that radio and television will be regulated by law but that there will be no prior censorship dealing with the content of broadcasts. The third paragraph grants a similar freedom of speech as in the first for other means of making ideas and feelings public but allowing censorship for reasons of decency when the public that has access may be younger than sixteen years of age. The fourth and last paragraph exempts commercial advertising from the freedoms granted in the first three paragraphs.[115]

The penal code does have laws sanctioning certain types of expression. Such laws and freedom of speech were at the centre of a public debate in The Netherlands after the arrest on 16 May 2008 of cartoonist Gregorius Nekschot. On 1 February 2014, Dutch Parliament abolished the law penalizing blasphemy. Laws that punish discriminatory speech however still exist and are occasionally used to prosecute.

The Dutch Criminal Code § 137(c) criminalizes:[88]

… deliberately giv[ing] public expression to views insulting to a group of persons on account of their race, religion, or conviction or sexual preference.

 

[icehorse]

I have to agree, the Dutch should never have passed 137(c) - yikes!