Portraits of Valor ~ Tibor Rubin

April 11, 2012

Trial of Lars Hedegaard and freedom to speak the truth about islam.

April 11, 2012



Round Three of the Trial of Lars Hedegaard

In Denmark, sticks and stones may break your bones, but insulting words will get you fined — to the tune of 5,000 kroner (or about $1,000). Article 266(b) of the Danish penal code, one of the more sweeping of the “hate speech” provisions, criminalizes, among other things, merely insulting groups of people due to their membership in enumerated protected classes.

On April 13, 2012, Lars Hedegaard — a journalist, historian, and president of the Danish Free Press Society – takes the appeal of his conviction under Article 266(b) to the Danish Supreme Court. Readers may recall that back in January of 2011, Hedegaard was tried and acquitted for remarks he made during a 2009 interview concerning sexual abuse within Muslim communities. (In a related story, Danish MP Jesper Langballe “confessed,” pleading guilty to violating Article 266(b) for remarks he made in support of Hedegaard.) But, in a strange twist, Hedegaard’s acquittal was appealed. He was retried on April 26, 2011, and convicted on May 3.

Thrice put in jeopardy

When Hedegaard appealed his conviction to the Danish Supreme Court, the prosecutor cross-appealed, demanding an increase in the fine. In an interview with the Legal Project, Mr. Hedegaard provided some thoughts on the process:

You could say in our country — as opposed to yours — we have not double but triple jeopardy. If the prosecutor doesn’t have his way in lower court, he can appeal to Superior Court. And if he doesn’t get it there, he can appeal to the Supreme Court. So, you can certainly be dragged through a legal process lasting years and years in this country. That is the sad state of affairs.

And dragged through an endless process Hedegaard has been. The remarks on which his conviction rests were made over two years ago. Since then, he has endured two trials, and the appeal to the Supreme Court is number three. But the fact that Denmark’s high court has chosen to hear Hedegaard’s appeal is significant. As with the U.S. Supreme Court, review is at the discretion of the court. Hedegaard remarked:

In my case it is questionable what can be overturned by the Supreme Court. The very fact that they have even allowed my case to go in front of the Supreme Court is very strange and very rare. There is a special committee that grants you the right to appeal to the Supreme Court. You cannot just do it. You need a special commission to do that. The very fact that I have been given this right might indicate that the court has found some technical problems with my conviction.

Further, rumor has it that seven judges are set to participate, a suggestion that the court may consider its upcoming decision to be of precedential value.

Stifling the truth

In a defamation case in the United States, the truth of the statement at issue is a defense to the cause of action. Not so for prosecutions under Article 266(b); truth is not an available defense. In his first two trials, Hedegaard was not allowed to offer any evidence that what he said was actually true (though he was permitted to reference it in his closing remarks), nor will he be allowed to offer such evidence at the Supreme Court. According to Hedegaard:

I should have the right to prove my case. I could have called witnesses. I could have quoted holy books and statements, and I could have referred to facts. But you cannot do that in a court of law in Denmark if you are accused under this infamous Article 266(b). Whether or not what you are saying is true is immaterial. If somebody feels offended or if the prosecutor thinks that somebody has a reason to feel offended, whether or not you speak the truth has no bearing on the case. That is what is surprising about Danish jurisprudence.

Though evidence of the truth of the statements is no defense, that did not stop the prosecutor in the Superior Court trial from raising the issue himself. According to Hedegaard, “Of course I wasn’t asked about evidence in favor of my contention that sexual assaults are prevalent or a big problem in Muslim culture.” He went on to say, “But the prosecutor took the liberty of referring to the content of what I had said and said you can’t even prove that. Which of course was quite true — I couldn’t prove it because I wasn’t allowed to prove any of it.” But beyond Hedegaard, who is being prosecuted for daring to raise the issues, who are the real victims of our not being able to have an open and honest discussion about sexual violence in any community?

The end of privacy?

Article 266(b), by its plain language, requires that for statements to be actionable under the provision, they must be made “publicly or with the intent of public dissemination.” Hedegaard maintains that he never intended his remarks, which were not made in public, to be publicly disseminated. The lower court found this issue dispositive in his case and acquitted him. In a statement following his acquittal, Hedegaard said that his “detractors” might claim he was acquitted on a mere technicality. While it is a “technicality” in one sense — Hedegaard’s right to say what he did should not rest on such unsure footing as whether a statement was made publicly or privately — that technicality has implications for privacy, too. Hedegaard explains:

I fully agree that I was acquitted on a technicality. There is no question about that. But it goes further than that. If I had been convicted as I eventually was [in the Superior Court] then of course it goes to the problem of privacy. What can you say in your home? What can you say among a small circle of friends or supposed friends if somebody overhears what you are saying? Somebody with a cell phone can take down what you are saying and claim that you said that and you should have known that he was there with a tape recorder with him. You can then be convicted. In that case we will be close to a totalitarian state in which the right of privacy no longer exists.

In my case I knew that I was being taped because the interviewer wanted to publicize something. I had no idea that I was also being filmed. The crucial point, however, is that of course I had not given the interviewer permission to just disseminate my remarks without giving me a chance to review them. I never give interviews without making sure that nothing is disseminated without my consent. This time the interviewer presented himself as a friend and admirer. He turned out not to be. In fact, he later witnessed against me. So I maintain that my remarks were private and not public. Otherwise you would have to condone entrapment in your own home.

The fact that the world’s thought police are willing to go after speech even in the private sphere reveals just how intent they are to impose their PC-limitations on the rest of us — truth, public debate on critical issues, and now privacy be damned. If you failed to understand where “hate speech” laws were leading us, let this turn of events underscore the point for you.

To be clear, a merely offensive remark should not be actionable whether made in public or private. Trying to keep all offensive speech within the private sphere is no solution. Indeed, much worthy public debate has the concomitant effect of hurting somebody’s feelings. That is part and parcel of healthy, open discussion — and life, frankly — a lesson the “sticks and stones” adage of childhood should have taught us.

But the lesson Hedegaard’s prosecution is teaching us is very different. It isn’t about the punishment of one man. It is a lesson about the state of freedom of speech in the West today.

Ann Snyder is a fellow at theLegal Project of the Middle East Forum.


Do “THEY” RAPE our little girls and women?

Do “THEY” RAPE  their little girls and women?

Upsetting: Sahar Gul was kept in a terrible condition by her husband's family, who tortured and beat her

 Sahar Gul was kept in a terrible condition by her husband’s family, who tortured and beat her


Read the rest of this entry »

Open Letter to the Members of the U.K.’s Theater and Film Industries

April 11, 2012

Members of the U.K.’s Theater and Film Industries sat down and put in writing their JEW HATRED with the following letter:

Dismay at Globe invitation to Israeli theatre – The Guardian, Thursday 29 March 2012

Open Letter by Members of the U.K.’s Theater and Film Industries: “We notice with dismay and regret that Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre in London has invited Israel’s National Theatre, Habima, to perform The Merchant of Venice in its Globe to Globe festival this coming May. The general manager of Habima has declared the invitation “an honourable accomplishment for the State of Israel.” But Habima has a shameful record of involvement with illegal Israeli settlements in Occupied Palestinian Territory.”

To the Members of the U.K.’s Theater and Film Industries – Eli E. Hertz | April 2, 2012

Writing this letter is a good way for me to discuss your denial of facts and the disrespect that you bestow on your British people’s history.

Did you know that your government was the leading force among the fifty-one member countries – the entire League of Nations – that unanimously declared on July 24, 1922:

“Recognition has been given to the historical connection of the Jewish People with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstructing their National Home in that country.”

Did you know that Britain as Mandatory became the official administrator and mentor over Jewish Palestine, the territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, where the “Mandate for Palestine” clearly stated as follow:

Article 5: “The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign power.” The territory of Palestine was exclusively assigned for the Jewish National Home.

Article 6: “The administration of Palestine … shall encourage … close settlement by Jews on the land, including State land and waste land not required for public purpose.”

Jewish settlements are legal, and there are no “Occupied Palestinian Territories.”

Did you know that your country’s hero Sir Winston Churchill had that to say about Jewish “Occupation” of Palestine:

“When it is asked what is meant by the development of the Jewish National Home in Palestine, it may be answered that it is not the imposition of a Jewish nationality upon the inhabitants of Palestine as a whole, but the further development of the existing Jewish community, with the assistance of Jews in other parts of the world, in order that it may become a centre in which the Jewish people as a whole may take, on grounds of religion and race, an interest and a pride.”

It is not “The (so-called) settlements” nor is it the (so-called)  “Occupation” that Arabs reject. They reject the internationally recognized lawful right of Israel to exist as a legitimate, secured, Jewish political entity – But you choose to collaborate with Arabs (Muslims and their leftist puppets)  that deliberately and systematically call for the destruction of Israel.

Palestinian Arabs have underscored their rejectionism to peace with wave after wave of terrorism at every juncture – that is, before the 1967 Six-Day War and even prior to the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, and this too is being ignored by you.

If we talk culture, you would be most interested to know how the [British] Palestine Royal Commission described Jewish culture’s achievement after their visit to Jewish Palestine in 1937:

“With every year that passes, the contrast between this intensely democratic and highly organized modern [Jewish] community and the old-fashioned Arab world around it grows sharper, and in nothing, perhaps, more markedly than on its cultural side. The literary output of the [Jewish] National Home is out of all proportion to its size. … But perhaps the most striking aspect of the culture of the [Jewish] National Home is its love of music.

“All in all, the cultural achievement of this little [Jewish] community of 400,000 people is one of the most remarkable features of the [Jewish] National Home.”

In fact, the term “Palestine” applied almost exclusively to Jews and the institutions founded by new Jewish immigrants in the first half of the 20th century, before the state’s independence. Take for example today’s Israel Philharmonic Orchestra, founded in 1936 by Jewish refugees who fled Nazi Germany, was originally called the “Palestine Symphony Orchestra composed of some 70 Palestinian Jews.”


 Seven Jewish Children

” Seven Jewish Children”  Pricks our conscience … .

and how… so does Jihad… London bombings, Bombing of Philippine Airlines, Bombing of Towers in Saudi Arabia, Bombing of the W T C, Tourist massacre in Luxor Egypt, Scotland Airport bombings, Train bombing in Madrid, Resort bombing in Bali, Pentagon Bombing, Thailand bombings, Istanbul bombings, Murders in Mumbai

=== 7 “Palestinian” Children ====

Tell your Palestinian child that Islam is a “Religion of Peace. ”.

Don’t tell her that the Muslim sword conquered all of the Middle East

Tell her the Koran commands Muslim to go to war so Islam will rule the world.

Don’t tell her about the wars between the Sunni and Shia brothers.  

Tell her there are 56 Islamic States in the world today.

Don’t tell her that all of them are oppressive and intolerant.

Tell her Jews are evil.

Don’t tell her that Israeli Muslims have equal rights in the Jewish State of Israel.

Tell her the West Bank belongs to the Palestinians.

Don’t tell her that under International Law the West Bank is part of Israel.

Tell her, her people are a unique nation

Don’t tell her “Palestinians” are really Jordanians or Syrians or Egyptian or….

Tell her Palestinians were the first to inhabit the land,

Don’t tell her that Jews lived in Israel 1,000s of years before the birth of Mohammed.

Tell her to support Hamas, Hezb’allah and all Jihad Warriors,

Don’t tell her, under Islamic rule, she will remain with half the human rights of a Muslim Man.

Tell her she must maintain the family honour.

Don’t tell her if RAPED she will need 4 male witnesses or be stoned to death.

 Tell her that Muhammad said: “If anyone changes his religion, kill him”

Don’t tell her all people in Israel are equal before the eyes of the law.

Tell her that someday the whole world will be Muslim

Don’t tell her the Kafir will be slaughtered and intimidated into submission

 Yes, DO TELL the so called “Palestinian” children and  the civilized world Islam has conquered 56 STATES as it is written in their Koran (Sura 9:5) “…kill the infidels wherever you find them…”

What is the solution to the Middle East Conflict?

T E A C H  

C H I L D R E N   


Stop the lies and blind hatred against Jews and Israel



“Günter Grass” – member of a Waffen-SS unit writes a JewHate poem…

April 11, 2012

…. in response to the Ynetnews article written by Daniel Bettini


 Dear Daniel Bettini

 It’s Grass’ timing that is completely off and so is yours. Israel has been putting up with a coordinated campaign of delegitimization by the Global Lefties, left homeless after the collapse of Soviet Union, in an unholly matrimony with antisemitic muslims who have nothing but contempt for these usefull idiots. After decades of grotesque antiisraeli propaganda – former waffen SS turned poet rises and calls israeli nukes a threat to peace. He as well as you know very well that Israel has not ever threatened another country, let alone with its presumed nukes, the existence of which Israel never confirmed. Israel has never even test fired a nuke. All of Israels wars have been defensive wars and the rumor of its nukes is the only deterrent the tiny Israel owns. Calling this a threat to peace is just one slander too many. Israel’s reaction is no different than that of any other country, but as usually we are holding Israel to a different standart than everybody else, aren’t we. Your article is most unwelcome.

 Nick ,  Sweden  

The prisoner of war record of German author and Nobel Prize winner Günter Grass as of his capture as a Waffen-SS soldier at the end of World War II.File:Günter Grass POW record.jpg

Ali Mallah was one of the 9 “Canadians” that traveled to join the ‘Global March to Jerusalem’

April 11, 2012
Press Release from the Global March to Jerusalem – North America
March 29, 2012
For immediate release

Nine Canadians left Canada over the past few days to join tens of thousands of marchers towards Jerusalem (or to the nearest point possible according to the circumstances of each location). They will be marching towards the holy city from areas around West Jerusalem, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, Jordan, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon.

The Global March to Jerusalem is a peaceful march which will take place tomorrow, March 30th (Palestinian Land Day) uniting the efforts of Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims, Christians, Jews, and all citizens of conscience of the world to put an end to Israel’s disregard for international law through the continuing occupation and ethnic cleansing of Jerusalem.

The nine Canadian participants, from Vancouver ( Maxine Kaufman-Lacusta ), Hamilton ( Ken Stone, Nafez Al-Fajem, Ann Halubeshen & Khawla Ibrahim), Guelph (Eva Bartlett), Ottawa (Rana Hamadeh), Toronto (Ali Mallah) and Montreal ( Amir Masoumi); are driven by their support of the struggle against Israeli apartheid and against the illegal Israeli annexation of East-Jerusalem and the West Bank.

To talk to the Canadians participating in the march abroad please call:
Sandra Ruch (416) 716-4010
Ehab Lotayef (514) 941-9792
Viva Ibraham (647) 929-5227
Khaled Mouamar (416) 879-6766

For more information about the march:

‘Freedom Party of Ontario’ – dinner on SATURDAY, APRIL 21, 2012 in Toronto

April 11, 2012


YOU ARE CORDIALLY INVITED to join us for dinner and the sounding of our Alert on:

6:30 pm – 9:30 pm
Best Western Primrose Hotel – Starlight Room
111 Carleton Street, Toronto, Ontario M5B 2G3
$100 per plate *

Doors open at 6 pm

* 60% tax creditable! Your net cost as low as $55

Master of ceremonies Robert Vaughan will kick off the evening with Freedom Party’s traditional toast to freedom: “To the freedoms we now enjoy, and to freedoms lost, to be regained…”

* * *

Dear Friends, Members and Supporters,

Sound the Red Alert!

Ontario is in crisis! Long in the making, it is a crisis that shows no signs of abating: Spiraling deficits. Unprecedented debt. A broken health care system. Broken promises. An education system that graduates illiterates. The most expensive electricity in North America. Irrational environmentalism. Censorship of dissenting opinion. The right to self defence so eroded that police can arrest parents because of their child’s sketch of a toy gun. Occupations. Anti-capitalism. Race-baced policing. Race-based schooling. A disappearing manufacturing base. Existing taxes rising. New taxes to burden us. The tyranny of Multiculturalism. Unemployment rates approaching depression levels.

Meanwhile, outside Ontario we can see the same symptoms, more advanced, taking the form of crashing economies, Islamism, terrorism, and the threat of another major war in the mid-east. All thanks to a single idea that used to come in a single colour: RED.

Today’s ‘reds’ come in a variety colours: not just in shades of red, but, orange, green, and blue. Even as Rome burns, they continue to call for more of the red menace: more state control, more state spending, higher taxation, more bans and prohibitions. ‘Pinkos’, one and all, with only their party colours left to distinguish them. Of course, it’s not their party colours that concern us; it’s the color of their IDEA that is creating the crisis: a CRIMSON tide of collectivism that threatens to wash away freedom itself.

That, in a colourful nutshell, is the nature of the crisis. It is also our reason for sounding the alert.

Master of ceremonies Robert Vaughan will kick off the evening with Freedom Party’s traditional toast to freedom: “To the freedoms we now enjoy, and to freedoms lost, to be regained…”

These words speak greatly to Freedom Party’s mission since its founding, and have been the opening feature of each and every dinner event ever held by Freedom Party. Your attendance on April 21 will help turn those aspirations into reality. At a time when most politicians are working hard to reduce our freedoms in favour of a red welfare state, we have an obligation to face up to some simple facts and realities.

In this crisis, as in every crisis, we are all faced with two, and only two, choices: We can do nothing, and be swept away. Or, we can fight like there’s no tomorrow. We choose to fight. For unless we do, there is no tomorrow. Worse, there won’t be any ‘yesterday’ either. History itself will be re-written and ‘taught’ to our children in state-run educational institutions. All the efforts, the accomplishments, the achievements and the people who achieved them will be gone, forgotten within the non-values of state-enforced egalitarianism. Where ‘keeping the peace’ is more important that stating the truth. Where keeping any part of what you earn is regarded as being greedy or evil. Where political correctness is forced correctness. Where morality is relative. Where the public sector is paid 20-40% more than the taxpayers who pay them. Where politicians, not citizens, control everything.

In the wake of what gets washed away, something else rises. Social climbers and enviers of wealth and accomplishment are ready at every turn to rule the productive by mediocrity. They get to ride in the wagon while the rest of us get to pull. It is critically important to understand that the crisis that faces Ontario is not the result of mismanagement, incompetence, or error, though there is plenty of that to go around. It is the consequence of the purposeful action of the other parties whose red philosophies can lead to no other possible results. It is the consequence of their political success. It is the consequence of the fact that there has been NO OPPOSITION, political or otherwise, in the province of Ontario. Except for Freedom Party.

There are answers and there are solutions. Now. Today. It is the delusion of our age to believe otherwise. It doesn’t take a renaissance in thought, nor an endless parade of ‘experts’, ‘politicians’, and ‘committees’ who never reach a clear consensus to govern rationally. Or to do what is right. It merely requires the correct knowledge of what is right to do and to act accordingly.

Ontarians need and deserve a real choice. They need a true opposition party with a leader who is ready to lead. Today. They have one: Freedom Party.

It is now up to us to make them aware of their new choice. Remember, the only defence the other parties actually have against Freedom Party is to keep the public ignorant of our presence. They fear freedom, rationality, and an objective morality more than they fear anything else. Which is why they fear Freedom Party.

Freedom Party’s 2012 Opposition Budget was delivered to all members of the Ontario legislature and to Ontario’s media on March 21. And yet, not a word mentioned in the major so-called ‘news media.’ For those in the business of reporting crisis, one might conclude that good news about Freedom Party is no news. This lack of coverage is not the result of the media being unaware of our presence. It is a result of the fact that they disagree with Freedom Party. Because the media is as red as the political parties they do choose to report on.

As a result, we must force knowledge of our existence into the traditional media via paid advertising. We must seize every opportunity to create our own media distribution sources. We must prepare for the next election. Volunteers, candidates, organizers, members and financial supporters are always the essential components of any such efforts. YOU can be part of that effort.

We’re looking forward to seeing you On April 21. We have a plan to turn the red tide and change the colour of Ontario’s politics. Because some things are black and white.

See you there!


Robert Metz, Party President, and
Paul McKeever, Party Leader

%d bloggers like this: