Listen to today’s broadcast:
I want to draw your attention to Europe in this article. I have spoken to you before about the United Nations resolution 1618 which makes it a criminal offense to speak disparagingly about Islam. Europeans are adopting this into their legal systems. As a result free speech is being crushed in Europe.
In Europe they don’t have the bill of rights that we have which guarantees our freedom of speech. Even our neighbors to the north in Canada don’t have the same freedom we do in this area. Tomorrow I will be dealing with what happened to a Canadian who spoke the truth about the Danish cartoons.
In Europe we are seeing increasing limits on the people’s right to speak their mind. The European Parliament is considering a measure which calls for the direct surveillance of any citizen of the EU who is suspected of being “intolerant.” This means that if you don’t meet their idea of tolerance, you will be watched by the government. You can’t voice an opinion that differs from the “party line.” This is the new tolerance, agree with me or else.
All 28 EU states are working to establish special administrative units to monitor any individual or group expressing views that the self appointed guardians of of the European multiculturalism deem to be intolerant.
There is a governing body that has proposed European Framework National Statute for the Promotion of Tolerance. It was recently presented to members of the Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Committee of the European Parliament.
The European Council on Tolerance and Reconciliation (ECTR) which describes itself as a “tolerance watchdog” that “prepares practical recommendations to governments and international organizations on improving interreligious and interethnic relations on the continent” is behind this.
This information is coming from Soeren Kern, a reporter that does a lot of good investigative in his articles.
The ECTR has produces a document that is so audacious in scope, while at the same time so vague in defining its terminology, that critics say the proposal, if implemented, would open a Pandora’s Box of abuse, thereby effectively shutting down the right to free speech in Europe.
Here are some of the things that are in this proposal:
·Section 1 (d), for example, the term “tolerance” is broadly defined as “respect for and acceptance of the expression, preservation and development of the distinct identity of a group.”
·Section 2 (d) states that the purpose of the statute is to “condemn all manifestations of intolerance based on bias, bigotry and prejudice.”
On the surface that doesn’t sound too sinister, but if you read further here is what you will find:
An explanatory note to Section 2 states: “Religious intolerance is understood to cover Islamophobia” but it provides no definition at all of “Islamophobia,” a term invented by the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1990s. If taken to its logical conclusion, Section 2 would presumably ban all critical scrutiny of Islam and Islamic Sharia law, a key objective of Muslim activist groups for more than two decades.
The document also declares that “tolerance must be practiced not only by governmental bodies but equally by individuals.” Section 3 (iv) elaborates on this: “Guarantee of tolerance must be understood not only as a vertical relationship (government-to-individuals) but also as a horizontal relationship (group-to-group and person-to-person).
The goal of these proposals and “administrative units” is not only to monitor government bodies, but also individuals.
According to Section 4 (f) (i) of the document: “There is no need to be tolerant to the intolerant. This is especially important as far as freedom of expression is concerned.”
Now consider what this means. If you are deemed by this new tolerance police to hold an opinion that doesn’t fit with idea of tolerance, there is no need to be tolerant of you. They have made it clear that any opinion that speaks ill of Islam (so-called Islamophobia) is not to be tolerated. Your “intolerance” makes you an enemy of the state.
Listen to this next statement:
Section 5 (a) states: “Tolerance (as defined in Section 1(d)) must be guaranteed to any group, whether it has long-standing societal roots or it is recently formed, especially as a result of migration from abroad.”
If something comes into your country that is foreign to your country’s values and culture, such as Islam, Shariah, etc. tolerance must be guaranteed for these people.
An explanatory note to Section 6 (a) states: “Members of vulnerable and disadvantaged groups are entitled to a special protection, additional to the general protection that has to be provided by the Government to every person within the State.” Another note adds: “The special protection afforded to members of vulnerable and disadvantaged groups may imply a preferential treatment.
Listen to what is being said. Those who come into your country as immigrants are considered disadvantaged and, therefore, are to be given special protection and preferential treatment. Can you see where this is going.
It should be obvious to all thinking people who is behind all of this. Proponents of Islam have worked their way into these “tolerance” groups and are forcing Islam upon the European people. Notice that this comes through groups like the UN and the EU. When a nation allows some external organization to have authority or influence over it, it is the end of that nation’s sovereignty.
Consider the consequences if Europe falls into the hands of Islam. What happens to our security here in North America when Islam controls the wealth of Europe? If the financial centers of Europe shut down the relationships with us, what will that do to our financial stability? What happens to our security when Islam controls the military might and the nuclear weapons of Europe?
You can see that the machinery is being put in place to shut down any opponent of Islam. We have seen many examples of those who speak out against Islam. Look at what happened in Denmark with the Danish cartoons.
Example of Abuse…
Lars Hedegaard a free speech advocate in Denmark found himself in court charged with “hate speech” because of critical comments he made about Islam. His legal problems began in December 2009, when he said in a taped interview that there was a high incidence of child rape and domestic violence in areas dominated by Muslim culture.
He was acquitted by the Danish Supreme Court in 2012 on charges of “hate speech” for critical comments he made about Islam. The Supreme Court stressed that the substance of the charges against Hedegaard – public criticism of Islam, — is still a crime punishable by imprisonment.
In Holland Geert Wilders, the leader of the Party for Freedom, produced a film trying to expose the dangers of Islam in his country. The film is entitled Fitna, and attempts were made to prosecute Wilders under Dutch anti-hate speech laws in June 2008. The prosecutors could not find enough evidence so the charges were dropped.
Because of organizations of Turkish, Moroccan and Antillean people in the Netherlands, and an organization of mosques on 21 January 2009, a three-judge court of appeal ordered the public prosecutor to try Wilders. The charges were:
2.Inciting hatred against Muslims because of their religion
3.Inciting discrimination against Muslims because of their religion
4.Inciting hatred against non-western immigrants and Moroccans because of their race
5.Inciting discrimination against non-western immigrants and Moroccans because of their race
Result: On 23 June 2011, Wilders was acquitted by the court of all charges, because his statements were, “acceptable within the context of public debate.”
If you were to watch the film you would find that all he did was quote Muslim scriptures and show how Muslims had followed the teachings of Muhammad over the past 1400 years. For this he was charged with “hate speech.”
Just look at what is happening here in North America and you will see that we are headed down the same road. We must warn our nations before it is too late. If you find this information interesting and useful, share it with others. Put it on Facebook, Linkedin, Google+, our any other place you can to get the message out.
66total visits,2visits today