A former deputy leader of Britain First has been sentenced to 180 hours community service over a speech she made in Belfast.
Her trial was swift:
“Jayda Fransen, 33, was found guilty of stirring up hatred during a speech about Islam in August 2017.
“She was also convicted for separate comments at a peace wall in the city.
“Convicting Fransen, of Moat Avenue in Donaghadee, County Down, a judge said her words were “a general, vehement attack against a religious group.”
“”The speech was made during the “Northern Ireland Against Terrorism” event two years ago. Britain First leader Paul Golding, 37, and two other English men, John Banks and Paul Rimmer, were previously acquitted on similar charges.
“They were accused of using threatening, abusive or insulting words intended to stir up hatred or arouse fear.
“During the trial, defense lawyers argued that each of the accused was entitled to freedom of expression, no matter how offensive their speeches may be.
“The court heard that Fransen told those gathered at the rally that there was no moderate version of Islam and that “these people are baying for our blood”.
Comment:
As the celebrated apostate ibn Warraq has said, “there are moderate Muslims, but Islam itself is not moderate.”
Fransen knows that there is no “moderate” version of the Qur’an and hadith. There is only one Qur’an for all Muslims. The hadith, too, remain the same for all members of the umma. .There are those “moderate Muslims”” who choose to ignore the 109 Qur’anic verses commanding Muslims to “fight” and to “kill” and to “smite at the necks of” and to “strike terror in the hearts of” Unbelievers, but those verses remain in the Qur’an, immutable, with only the milder, earlier, “Meccan” verses being abrogated by the harsher, later, “Medinan” verses. In claiming that there is “no moderate” version of Islam Fransen is simply recognizing this bleak reality.
“She says that “these people are baying for our blood.” Whom does she mean? Not every last Muslim. Clearly, “these people’” means those Muslims who want to dutifully follow the commands to wage jihad against the Unbelievers. The Muslim Believer who reads, and attempts to follow, or hep others to carry out, such Qur’anic verses as 2:191-193, 3:151, 4:89, 5;51, 8:12, 8:60, 9;5,9:29,47:4, and 98:6, that tells him to fight against and to kill the Unbelievers, “the most vile of created beings,’” is surely “baying for the blood” of non-Muslims.
Fransen added: “Islam says every single one of you wonderful people here today deserves to be killed.”
Again, she is talking about Islam, not all Muslims. The 109 Qur’anic verses that command violent Jihad (fight, kill, smite, sow terror)against the Unbelievers (“every single one of you wonderful people here today”) are firmly based on the idea that the Unbelievers “deserve to be killed.” Is Fransen to be punished for pointing this out?
“Those attending the rally were then told it was time for the world to come together against “the one common enemy.”
Some apologists for Islam like to claim that Muslims are opposed only to people in the West, not because they are Unbelievers but because Muslims resent the West’s “colonial past,” during which Muslims suffered. This ignores the fact that European colonialism scarcely affected most of the Arab world. In North Africa only Algeria was a colony in the classic sense. In the Middle East, the Arabian peninsula was off-limits to Unbelievers, save for the entrepôt of Aden, which resupplied ships on the England-to-India route, and a handful of British garrisons on the upper Gulf coast, designed to keep the peace among the local rulers and tribes. The British held mandates for Iraq and Palestine, the French held the mandate for Syria/Lebanon; both mandatory authorities were there to prepare the local Arabs for self-government (and, in Western Palestine, to do the same for the Jews). Mandates were not colonies.
Islam had been waging war on non-Muslims for more than a thousand years before “European colonialism” came to full flower. During the 1,400 years of its existence, Islam’s adherents have been waging war not just against Western Christendom, but against all non-Muslims: Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains, and other even smaller groups. This endless war is not one of Islam versus the West, but of Islam versus All the Rest. And it is the recognition of this shared victimhood at the hands of aggressive Islam that led Jayda Fransen to call for unity among the many different victims of Islam, allied against “the one common enemy.” There was nothing inaccurate in her description of Islam; in defining all non-Muslims as its enemy, Islam logically becomes for them “the common enemy.”
“The judge told the court: “I’m satisfied these words were intended to stir up hatred and arouse fear.”
How did Jayda Fransen “stir up hatred” of Muslims? She did not suggest that Muslims, as individuals, should be hated. She knows there are Muslims who ignore large parts of the Qur’an. She did not call for violence. And there was no violence following her speech. She simply was pointing out how normative Islam views the Unbelievers, Given how many apologists for Islam continually insist on the “peace” and “tolerance” of Islam, she offered a most useful and necessary corrective.
“He also found her guilty over a separate, filmed incident at a Belfast peace wall in December 2017.
“On that occasion, the court heard that Fransen declared the “Islamification” of Britain would lead to similar walls to separate the two sides.
Fransen was predicitng that an ever-larger Muslim population in the U.K. would lead to two parallel societies, One would consist of those Muslims who refuse to integrate into British society, reject its laws and customs, and hope to live, within the U.K., by Muslim rules and principles. These are the True Believers. As against them would be all others — Christians, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, and those “moderate” Muslims who reject much of what is contained in Islam’s texts and teachings. Between the two groups, there would be an invisible mental wall separating them, and perhaps many real walls, too, dividing Muslim areas from non-Muslim ones. Fransen’s prediction about “islamification” leading to such walls may or may not come true, but it is a legitimate worry; we already have hundreds of No-Go areas all over Europe, where non-Muslims fear to enter. She should not have been punished for alerting her audience to this consequences of “islamification.”
“During sentencing on Friday, a defense lawyer for Fransen said she had now made her home in Northern Ireland.
“He also said she intended to lodge an appeal.
“He told the court no actual violence was occasioned as a result of Fransen’s conduct.
“Sentencing her, the judge said the words she used were “unlawful”, adding that normally a custodial sentence would be imposed.
What was “unlawful”–or untrue — about Jayda Fransen’s words? Nothing. We can only conclude that British justice has reached such a sorry state that judges now treat as “unlawful” those statements about Islam which may be perfectly true, but which must not be said lest non-Muslims think worse of Islam. That, of course, would never do.

CRUSADER says
It’d be a shame if her sentence to 180 hours community service
would include some acts which go counter to her message and values.
First Amendment rights are important for a country to have….
revereridesagain says
Wafflers on the freedom of speech need to remember that if it is outlawed the only alternatives are silence and violence. I daily thank the authors of the First Amendment to our constitution for placing that barrier between us and those alternatives.
mortimer says
UK really needs its equivalent of the First Amendment. The “Bill of Rights of the United Kingdom” of 1689 does not go far enough. It merely states (regarding freedom of expression): Freedom of Speech.
“That the Freedome of Speech and Debates or Proceedings in Parlyament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any Court or Place out of Parlyament.”
The Human Rights Act 1998 added a personal right to free speech that had not existed in the UK before, however, later legislation has virtually gutted that right.
Parliament should proceed to make the right to free speech much more protected in the UK so that future authoritarian governments cannot with a simple majority vote wipe it away in one stroke.
Brenrod says
You appear to have ignored the jihad terrorism which we have just witnessed in this absurd sentence. The real jihad is Muslims imposing Sharia law as shown by this court. How did this arrive, you can be sure it involves money.
Muslims are turning Britain topsy-turvy without even having a majority. I noticed that the daily hate speech of Muslims towards Jews is not bringing similar charges. Your statistics are meaningless as Muslims are globally bringing violence intolerance insurer to whatever nation or land That they occupy. England has become a shadow of its former self, reverting to cowardly appeasement as it did when Hitler was slaughtering Jews and invaded Czechoslovakia.
Brenrod says
This was meant to be posted in your comment regarding statistics of Muslims and Jihad. Sorry about errors as I am using voice input.
Lydia Church says
Then one must refuse to do those acts.
I would refuse!
mortimer says
Jayda Fransen’s comment at issue was merely an overstatement which would apply to no more than 15% of Muslims who self-declare as supporters of jihad-terrorism. About 85% of Muslims are not supporters of jihad terrorism. 35% of Muslims self-declare as relatively unconcerned about Islamic law or political Islam. This means 35% of Muslims are virtually ‘Muslims-in-name-only’ (MINO). Less that 1% of Muslims are jihadists.
Jayda Fransen should limit her comments to verifiable facts in future. Overgeneralization of the opinions of Muslims based on her personal guesses is not scientific or accurate.
The UK intelligence services have identified as many as 20,000 would-be jihadists in the UK alone. Jayda Fransen’s comment would apply to them for certain.
I have met many would-be jihadists and what distinguishes them is not their demeanor or clothing or beard. It is their IDEOLOGY of jihadism, namely, the idea that CONDUCTING JIHAD is the MOST IMPORTANT ACTION IN ISLAM and the action that GUARANTEES ENTRY to the ISLAMIC PORNO-PARADISE.
We do not need to EXAGGERATE the facts to show that Islam is both absurd and morally repugnant. The JIHADISM doctrine on its own and the AL WALAA WAL BARAA teaching on its own are enough to repudiate Islam.
I encourage Jayda Fransen (and all JW readers) to MASTER the teaching of AL WALAA WAL BARAA (Islamic apartheid … a truly hate-filled doctrine). The hatred is coming out of Islam and it is directed against all Kafirs … not the other way around.
http://westindanger.com/wb/walaa-baraa.html
Rufluc says
According to Brigette Gabriel, (from a US poll), the amount of Muslims who support Jihad range from 15% – 25%.
There are 1.7 billion Muslims globally, which means between 255 million and 425 million Muslims support Jihad. That’s more than the entire population of the USA! Kinda puts things into perspective doesn’t it?
I personally don’t think Fransen was exaggerating at all!
What’s more, it is known that ‘moderate’ Muslims also in some cases give birth to even more radical Muslims. Remember the London bombers? All UK born and UK educated. Didn’t stop them from murdering 57 people did it?
elee says
Good call Rufluc, mortimer’s statistics in my view don’t capture the sleeper effect of Islam. Of course, the limitation to all these statistics is, they measure what people tell the surveyor, not what they’ll actually do……when they or their son “self-radicalize,” or when objective reality makes the question something iother than part of a survey. What will they do, all those theoretical non-jihadis, when they have the choice of saving some kafir’s life or snitching out their friends?
mortimer says
elee, those are not ‘my’ statistics. They are confirmed by a variety of companies who do scientific surveys. The questions may not be the questions you want them to ask, but they have identified the jihad-supporters consistently at around 15%. Those who are ‘in favor’ of a jihad group, may or may not want to be personally involved. About one-tenth of one percent of all Muslims are potentially violent jihadists. That’s conservatively about ten to 15 million out of 1.5 billion Muslims.
I agree that HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of Muslims are ‘in favor’ of jihad terror groups. This is a scary situation.
And as for the more ‘modern’ Muslims? Some of them are now TURNING IN THE RADICALS. I know this for a fact.
There is no way to tell which Muslim is a radical and which one is modern. The radicals use taqiyya to disguise their intentions even from their own family.
gravenimage says
Actually, all too few Muslims turn in Jihadists to the Infidel authorities–because they do *not* consider this to be “radical”.
And the idea that every “radical” Muslim is hiding it from their families is simply not borne out.
CRUSADER says
“…..one-tenth of one percent of all Muslims are potentially violent jihadists. That’s conservatively about ten to 15 million out of 1.5 billion Muslims.”
Hmmm…..
1 billion is 1000 million
10% of 1 billion is 100 million
1% of 1 billion is 10 million
0.1% of 1 billion is 1 million
Well…. so….
1 tenth of 1 percent of 1.5 billion = 1.5 million Muslims….
…spread out across the globe and in many cases concentrated in strategic locations, many plotting violence — or sleeping waiting to awaken.
Raymond Ibrahim conservatively figured that the number of VIOLENT JIHADISTS
is 0.2% of 1.5 billion Muslims equates to 3 million potential terrorists triggered by an outrageous ideology!!!
(see VIDEO by Prager U. — farther below)
Of course, there are many ways to inflict Jihad….
So, the damage being done by Muslims to the West is FAR MORE than all these figures present !!!!
It is ASTOUNDING !!!!
Cancer growth at exponential rates….
Radical times call for Radical measures.
gravenimage says
Grimly, Mortimer has said this before–that Jayda Fransen should not be able to speak openly about Islam.
But her saying that there is no moderate version of Islam is absolutely correct.
mortimer says
GI, I have never denied the right of free speech to anyone. You are maligning me. Jayda’s opinions are simply overgeneralizations which are inaccurate. Most Muslims, in fact, do not wish for the violent deaths of kafirs, because they know very little about Islamic history.
Jayda simply overgeneralized and I think she could have admitted it. I personally try to confess when I am wrong, since no one is perfect. Admitting our mistakes improves a person’s credibility. I greatly admire Jayda’s courage in standing up against Islamic supremacism. Even when our statements are perfectly clear and perfectly accurate, there will always be someone to criticize and find fault. My intention is not attack Jayda, but help those who want to criticize the IDEOLOGY of Islam.
Frank Anderson says
This result appears to be worthy of a “court” in Nazi Germany.
CRUSADER says
Already convicted prior to hearing, judgment, pronouncement.
Frank Anderson says
The one arguably “fair” trial in Nazi Germany saw all the defendants acquitted except for Marinus Van der Lubbe, who was accused of setting the Reichstag fire. Following that trial there were no more until the end of the war. I have been on the receiving end of such “fair” trials in the US. This is not the place to describe them.
Rufluc says
The pathetic liberal West is being played. Right into the hands of the radical Muslims that seem to hold some kind of control over our ultra liberal government’s, which are now passing laws, like so called ‘hate’ laws, to undermine the views of the conservative right.
It seems everything Muslims demand, Muslims get, including complete censorship of their evil intentions. It’s as though we are to lay down and allow them to just go ahead and destroy us all, because we are not allowed to show any opposition to their invasion, otherwise it’s construed as a ‘hate’ crime. But of course these laws don’t apply to Muslims. They are free to continue with their open hatred of the West.
Why is this? Partly because our authorities allow them to do this by turning a blind eye and partly because they simply dress their evil intent up in a pseudo religious candy coating of divine respectability, that our pathetic uneducated judges cannot clearly see for what it really is.
It’s far easier to appease the Muslims by convicting another patriot like Fransen who had the courage to stand up and tell the truth. But clearly the truth doesn’t count for anything anymore. It certainly didn’t in this case. Especially if that truth offends and thwarts the intent of radical Muslims, who have managed to dupe our authorities on an industrial scale, into believing they are of no threat, whilst their numbers steadily increase at an alarming rate in our lands.
They are here to conquer. They have made no secret of their intent. But our authorities still persist with their foundless belief that they present no threat to us. Well, our authorities are going to be rudely awakened when they are all sent packing in future government elections. I then hope they will all be bought to account for their treachery!
CRUSADER says
U.F.O.
Uneducated — therefore ignorance/neglect/innocence from establishment
Feared — therefore status quo allows Muzzies to do most anything to avoid riots
Orchestrated — therefore the Leftist agenda “progresses” via Islamic shield
Rufolino says
Very well said, Rufluc.
In Europe, Moslems have manipulated authorities into treating them as a Privileged Class.
Except in Hungary, Poland, Italy. Which in the years to come (when Europeans have woken to dreadful reality), will be countries desperately sought as a refuge from lawlessness.
Bill4USA says
Just like the liberals in the US or conservatives in GB the Muslims are destroying Western culture from within. Violent jihad is like the distraction in a magic trick. Look over here while I sneak the card out of my sleeve.
Peter Stephens says
Islam! The Darkness of Ignorance and Excrement!
John Allan says
‘… a judge said her words were “a general, vehement attack against a religious group.”’
There are religious groups, and there are religious groups. Then there’s Islam.
Phil Copson says
“….“a general, vehement attack against a religious group.”
————————————————————————-
The judge is lying – it was a general, vehement warning of what Islam intends.
gravenimage says
Spot on, Phil.
elee says
Hey Brits……..if you can’t invent First and Fourteenth Amendments, you know, about free speech and all…….then the least you could do is invent Equal Protection clauses like our Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. You know, so a prohibition on “hate speech” would apply to the local imam preaching the Koran verbatim, as well as this woman when she says the exact same things. Not that our implementation is 100% of course…….
CRUSADER says
British Judges !
pstwhew!
angryoldgitblog says
I am curious.
Was the accused convicted in a Court of Law by the jury?
Or was she unlawfully convicted in a no jury Court of Adminstration, operating illegally?
Halsbury’s Laws of England.
“All courts with no jury, are not Courts of Law, practicing Criminal Law, but Courts of Administration, practising Administrative Law.
“They are unlawful and operating illegally, they are merely an agreement between the executive and the Juduciary.
“No, Act, can ever be passed to make them lawful, as all public servants are bound by the Queen’s Coronation Oath, “To govern according to the laws and usages of this Realm.”
Just thought I’d ask?
Note: If issued with an unlawful fine (all fines issued before conviction of a crime, in a Court of Law, following conviction by the jury) it is illegal and banned, Attempted theft by criminal deception.
Why are you funding your local Council which operates illegally, a no jury Court of Admistration to rob you, or steal children?
Just asking?
Anjuli Pandavar says
Hugh, I would like to differ on one point: to “reject much of what is contained in Islam’s texts and teachings,” does not put “moderate Muslims” on the same side as non-Muslims. Non-Muslims reject *all* of Islam’s texts and teachings. No “moderate Muslim,” for example, regards Muslims as equal to non-Muslims; they are superior to them, a position held by all Muslims.
Thank you, though, for such an extensive commentary on the Jayda Fransen travesty of justice.
CRUSADER says
Interesting insight, Anjuli Pandavar.
gravenimage says
Important points.
Anjuli Pandavar says
Thank you, Crusader and GI.
Simo Hayha says
“Moderate muslim?” Ah, The ones who have YET to sever a kufir’s head.
Demsci says
Yes, important insight, Anjuli. I wonder what their explanation is?
It must be about following the one true God in the only way that that God wants it. With a book written by Him and a special ordained last prophet. With only the reward of heaven for THEM. While the rest of us for certain will get PUNISHED.
Nazism and communism were more ways to create the best society possible, according to followers, not some message from God. At best the message came from good thinking humans that are to be venerated, according to followers.
People like me, maybe us, also think they adhere to the better culture, ideology, the better political system, democracy. But that is after long hard thinking, reading about history and philosophy and more, and after comparing this system with Nazism/ Fascism/ Communism and Islam and others and finding no better political systems in history.
For us the democratic constitutions and the writings of enlightenment philosophers and of people like Churchill are much better Most Important Guiding Texts than those of Islam; Quran, Sira, Hadiths. We do have any number of better prophets, like Churchill, than Islam’s.
And if we are to be seen as believers in our texts, then the Muslims are the unbelievers, the kafirs, in our texts. And there might even be apostates from Democracy defecting to Islam. And Muslims are really obstacles, or at best competitors, for our political system to succeed on most of the planet in the 21st century.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
The concept of a “hate crime” must be explicitly rejected, by SCOTUS here in the States. Hate crime exists only in the imagination, the practice of policing for it throws the door wide open to Speech Police and even the Thought Police. How do you know what a guy’s thinking when he attacks somebody? Just charge him to a good old fashioned Assault and Battery felony count.
As for this woman, what’d she do, yell fire in a crowded theater? Now that I think about it, yes she did. Haa.
Frank Anderson says
A.P.F., why should the same crime committed against two “different” people be treated differently? Is that not a denial of Equal Protection Under The Law? At least in the US, with the Constitution, I think there is a problem that sooner or later will be argued on appeal.
gravenimage says
Of course–as APF no doubt meant–there actually *is* a time when yelling “fire!” in a crowded theater is the right thing to do–that is when the theater is *on fire*.
CRUSADER says
** Bravo ! **
gravenimage says
Thank you, CRUSADER.
gravenimage says
Jayda Fransen Found Guilty Of Speech “Stirring Up Hatred”
………………….
Note that Fransen did not say anything that is not true.
CRUSADER says
Radical Islam: The Most Dangerous Ideology !!!
( — Raymond Ibrahim for Prager U.)
Is radical Islam our generation’s most dangerous ideology? Is it comparable to what Nazism and Communism were in the 20th century? Or are Islamists no more dangerous than extremist Christians, Jews, and Buddhists?
Raymond Ibrahim, author of “The Al Qaeda Reader,” explains what radical Islam is, and shows how Muslims and non-Muslims alike can help defeat it.
WW2 vs Fascism = 50 million dead
Cold War vs Communism = 100 million dead
Islam is a fusion of fascism and totalitarianism under Shariah Law as Islamist expansion occurs
Islamists = 10% of world’s Muslims = 150 MILLION !
Jihadists willing to do violence = 3 MILLION terrorists ! (conservatively figured)
Shirley Ann says
Ms. Fransen was found GUILTY, long before she went thru the British Legal System. Her Guilt was established, the second that she stood up to the Vile, Political Ideology of Islam, by actually expressing it in Speech! She spoke the TRUTH, but Truth is NO DEFENSE, when you SIN against the Ruling Ideology of a Country. ISLAM Is the Ruling Ideology of the U.K.
Rufolino says
IN EFFECT, yes, Islam is the ruling ideology of the UK. They are the new aristocracy.
But naturally, no one in authority is going to state the truth in words.
I remember Churchill as Prime Minister, I remember England at the time of the Coronation. The England of today fills me with shame.
CRUSADER says
Jamie Glazov | ACWT – Interview
America Can We Talk?
DENNIS PRAGER recommends the book as “MOST IMPORTANT!”
Jamie Glazov, author of “Jihadist Psychopath,” talks about the dangerous mentality that allows radical Islamists to gather followers.
Debbie Georgatos!
http://americacanwetalk.org
Author of “Ladies, Can We Talk”, a book that inspires women to recognize our influence on our country’s future, through our power in the voting booth, and our increased participation in the national political conversation.
na says
There are two news
In Brunai a lady arrested for facebook post by sharia police . The post was “Christianity has nothing to do with terrorism and crusade”.
Another news Indonesia man threatened govt officials that “I will kill you all and I will set fire on all vehicles with the help of Bagdadi”. The reason was due to heavy traffic jam he could not reach mosque for prayer properly
na says
a lady arrested by sharia police for facebook post
***set all vehicles on fire
andra says
Well, I guess that this is only one of the first condemnations of this Kind, unless the conservatives make the race in the EU votes on May 26th.
The EU has signed the Migration pact. And this pact includes that you must not critizise Islam. So, if you critizise Islam you are guilty and that´s that.
Az gal says
I love Jayda Fransen. So now it is forbidden to speak the truth about Islam in the UK?
gravenimage says
Tommy Robinson has had the same experience…
george says
People do not like the truth, and the courts ignore it anyway
Veracious_one says
While it might be said not all Muslims are jihadists the truth is that sudden jihad syndrome can strike at anytime, anywhere, especially when the not so violent Muslim becomes more devout….
Bella says
How many hate preaching imams are doing community service? Will the people of the Uk stand up for her and march in the streets? Doubtful.
Terra Nova says
Muslims started to come over to the Western Country already a few decades ago, for “a better life”, playing the victim role then already, but it was already all in the planning, start slow , don’t tell them your real plans
you can work it out later in the planning.
” If you don’t like a rule…..
Just follow it ……
Reach for the top ….
and change the rule…” Adolph Hitler in 2nd world war ( together with his Islam friends)
Who spend a decade saluting: Allah in Heaven, HITLER ON EARTH.
WHEN YOU DEAL WITH MUSLIMS, YOU DEAL WITH THE SPAWN OF HITLER”
Where they prevail, the next Pogrom is never far of !!!
It is so much Taqyya trough the last decades, our Western Governments were so stupid and so treasonous ,it is unbelievable. I followed a TV program last night of a debate in the Netherlands of some parties and the second man of the EU, who wants to become the new president of the EU. He still wants to receive all “refugees”, and it does not matter to him “refugees” from war countries or the ones for a better life, it was amazing, he wants to punish the countries like Hungaree and Polen and Italy for their stop to refugees, they all have to abide by what the EU says. He is a Dutchman, Western Europe has to obey the EU, and can not decide for themselves and their country what they want to do. He was quite angry that the right is coming up now, by his performance you can see right away who he is, he is mad that the right is coming up just before he was so sure to win, and now he is not sure anymore and that makes him angry, that he is not getting his way, I used to think he was ok. but now I have seen a total different man. Nothing is what it seems, it shows over and over again. We have to stay alert, because the white people, Jews and people of other faith then Islam, will be the next victims, they never look inside their own hearts and brains
I think the muslims have been oppressed so long, by their dictators, clerics, sheiks, Imams, and have been living in a state of full 100% controle, they don’t know any other life for so long, the same will be with North Koreans and other very oppressed people. People loose the normal perspective of a reasonable free living, when the military came to concentration camp and opened the gates for the people, they did not want to walk out, because they were to afraid, because concentration camps were their only places they knew, it was too scary for them to go out into freedom at last (beside the point that they could hardly walk and did not have food etc.) To live in prison from whatever bad it is, for so long, it does something very bad to people, and
can make them very dangerous sometimes, because they don’t have compassion, or pity, or respect any more and became inhuman almost, and if you live a life almost in captivity of mental and psychic heavy boundaries, it breeds HATE, FEAR always does that.’
, it does not make people any less dangerous and I am not a muslim cuddle, but sometimes I think I understand something of the human race who have lived constantly in fear of something.
I absolutely hate Islam, but I still try to have some compassion for people, otherwise I come into a spiral
of straight away hate, without the fear, and I absolutely do not want that for myself. But we can not solve their problems and because of what I think, for a lot of atrocities, they should be kicked out of the country and the Jihadi’s too and forbid them ever to enter the country again.
And emigrants and refugees, there should be a stop, until everything has been sought out, they are bringing the same problems they had themselves , along with them, only now they have the hate and dream of being on the other side, like they are the dictators and feel superior and can do what they want, because they want revenge, on who or what?
It “must be” that we can feel how it is to be oppressed, but you have put that on the wrong people. It is one big mess, and we can go back 1000send of years and even longer, but that will not help. You can not build something new on the old systems, within a short time everything has fallen back into the old systems, bu I think it is only possible to create a new world with intervention of the Creator Himself, and our help.
God only helps the ones, who help themselves and that is so true(in my experiences), we have to let go of almost all we learned, because those were things, other people thought were truth, so they told us, what to do, how to do it, how much, how little, how to behave, but sadly enough it is not the Truth. We have to learn ourselves what is true and what not. Our parents and teachers did not know what is the truth, and you can only learn by experience, so in a strange way, what you do wrong and when you get your consequences
and see what you did wrong and why and what your intentions where and you learn, and try not to make the same mistake,. it is a step higher on the ladder to evolution.
But we have to stay very alert with people and what is happening with nature and where on this earth.
And my gut feeling is, they are doing something in secret(they always do anyway) but it is like they are waiting for something and that is why we have to stay alert.
In spite of everything, have a good day, !
patriotliz says
What evidence is there that Jayda stating the truth about what Islam teaches had inspired violence?
On the other hand, there’s unlimited examples that the life and example of Muhammad and the words in the basic texts of Islam have resulted in and, continue to cause violence and death in Europe and around the world.
Frank Anderson says
P.L. in the corrupt environment clearly imitating Nazi Germany evidence makes no difference. Watch any of dozens of television accounts and see if there is any difference. Accused are guilty upon accusation. Trials are a sham with no possibility of acquittal. Sentences will get more and more horrific as the “public” becomes brainwashed and desensitized. Watch and See for Yourself.
What you have written is, in my opinion, absolutely correct on both counts. But we are not dealing with any excuse of honest jurists, prosecutors or politicians. Go through the entire list of Nazi collaborators in WWII from Norway to France, and from France to Bulgaria, and everywhere else in between. Where were any accused of “resistance” given any excuse of a fair trial with any chance at all of acquittal?
The only non-suicidal option is to follow the example that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union. What did it take? Talented people escaping to drain the system. Less skilled people getting fed up with corruption and oppression in a dead economy. The Soviet Union failed because of dishonest accounting. The decisions being made now in the EU are equally dishonest and destructive to the long term viability of its economy and social order. How far will that collapse have to go before people say no more?
Lt Mason says
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) holds the view:
1. that freedom of expression as one of the “essential foundations of a democratic society” because it guarantees the right of every person to exchange information, debate ideas and express opinions.
2. that (1) is especially important in the context of politics, even when such expressions are uncontroversial, offending, shocking or disturbing, in order that members of the public can decide how to vote and which policies to support. Limits on freedom of expression can only be justified where it is strictly necessary to do so.
In my humble opinion, the “offending” speech was just a collection of quotes from the Holy Quran. Their Freedom of Expression has been violated.
Frank Anderson says
Lt, for what it may be worth, I agree with you. The problem for all of us is that law makes no difference when totally corrupt people are in power. Who but corrupt people would flood their “own” country with violent parasites? What more proof is needed of the corruption and betrayal of the fiduciary duty these “leaders” have by their positions of authority? All the high sounding proclamations are meaningless, as they are in many other settings and jurisdictions when the result is contrary to the aspiration. There was no commitment to carrying out and enforcing these HOPES when they were made because it would diminish the power of the people making them to control the people living under them. How many times in history have people in power used that power for the genuine good of the people they control? Very FEW.
UNCLE VLADDI says
Re: “How did Jayda Fransen “stir up hatred” of Muslims? She did not suggest that Muslims, as individuals, should be hated.”
Try this: “How did Jadis “stir up hatred” of Nazis? She did not suggest that Nazis, as individuals, should be hated.”
i.e: “Hate the National Socialism, not the Nazis whose activities enable it! Whee!”
Truth says
The UK has speech police, much like Nazi Germany or China.