andrel <byt### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> He was consistently trying to provoke violence towards groups of 
> people by selective portrayal of individual actions as that of a whole 
> group (while trying to keep within the boundaries of what is just not 
> racism). He was also trying to anger a lot of Dutch people that happened 
> to have immigrant forefathers, apparently hoping that one of them would 
> be so angry that he would misbehave. Or so at least is one view on what 
> he does.
> The case against him was therefore on provoking violence and not on 
> freedom of speech, just as Assange's case is on rape and not freedom of 
> speech.

  Good to see you are not prejudiced in the least.

  Why would someone create a video critical of islam and islamic culture?
There's only one possible reason: To provoke violence towards muslims and
to anger them. Given this axiom and law of nature, the only remaining
question is how to punish such a person for such a despicable act.

  Of course at the same time videos criticizing eg. christians and
christian culture is ok, and completely under freedom of expression.

  Double standard much?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message