I am so glad to see Jewish groups in Europe leading the way to restrict speech and to send people to prison for jokes.
A Belgian court sentenced controversial French comedian Dieudonne M’bala M’bala on Wednesday to two months in prison and a 9,000 euro ($9,534) fine for making anti-Semitic jokes during a comedy show in 2012.
Dieudonne, known for his use of jokes based on ethnic stereotypes, has repeatedly been convicted of racism in France and fined for hate speech. He insists he is not anti-Semitic.
The court in Liege found the comedian, known by the stage name Dieudonne, had spread racist ideas by making discriminatory, anti-Semitic and holocaust-denying remarks in the 2012 gig in nearby Herstal, a court spokeswoman said.
He was not in court on Wednesday.
Judges said that the remarks, made in front of an audience of 1,100 people in the town of Herstal, were clearly calls to hatred and violence. By calling on Christians and Muslims to unite to kill Jews, he had incited genocide.
He was also ordered to pay for the entire text of the judgment against him to be printed in two leading French-language Belgian newspapers.
In March, he was given a two-month suspended sentence for condoning terrorism in a Facebook post shortly after Islamist attacks that killed 17 people in Paris in January.
He was later fined 22,500 euros for a jibe against a radio journalist in 2013, suggesting that hearing the broadcaster speak made him think of Nazi gas chambers.
The comedian, who began his career with a Jewish sidekick in the early 1990s, is credited with inventing the “quenelle”, a downward Nazi-like salute.
Originally active with anti-racist, left-wing groups, the Paris-born son of a Cameroonian father and French mother began openly criticizing Jews and Israel in 2002, and ran in the European elections two years later for a French pro-Palestinian party.
Where on earth do European countries get the idea that jokes should result in prison? What insane white people want to restrict speech? Well, it turns out that Jewish groups have led the way in restricting speech in France.
In France the Jewish organizations LICRA (Ligue internationale contre le racisme et l’antisemitisme) and CRIF(Conseil Représentatif des Institutions Juives de France) representing the Jews of France, which are some of of the driving forces in the promotion of hate speech legislation, the multicult and the defamation of nationalist organizations and individuals. This in spite of the fact that it is North African muslim immigrants who are the real threat to the life and well being of Jews in France. Both organizations have close ties with the Jewish Freemason Organization B’nai B’rith (In France formerly known as U.F.A.B.B).
LICRA (International League against Racism and Anti-Semitism) started as ‘The League against Pogroms’ in 1927 after the Jew Sholom Schwartzbart had murdered the Ukrainian national hero and enemy of the Bolsheviks in Paris in 1926. It then became LICA (League against Anti-Semitism) but changed name in 1979 to the present LICRA, in order to take full advantage of the cornerstone anti-racist law enacted in France in 1972. It took 51 years, before LICA found out that it missed the word ‘racism’ in its name.
League for Human Rights (La Ligue des Droits de l’Homme) was founded after the trial, sentencing, jailing and final acquittal of the Jewish officer Alfred Dreyfus. Founded in 1898. Staffed and supported heavily by Jews ever since.
Jewish book burning: The Jewish / Zionist organization LICRA managed to have the first French edition of Israel Shamir’s book Gallilea Flowers, in France published as L´Autre visage d´Israel burned.
The present ridiculous law in France which make it a punishable offense to even argue in favor of free historical research; the so called ‘Loi Gayssot’ (Gayssot Act) have been created according to Jewish wishes, pushed for by Jewish academics, like Pierre Vidal-Naquet, and some Jewish propagandists, like Serge Klarsfeld and Georges Wellers. The proces was supervised by Chief Rabbi René Samuel Sirat, proposed by the communist Parliament member Jean Claude Gayssot [not Jewish] and passed by the Jewish former Prime Minister Laurent Fabius, resulting in the infamous Fabius-Gayssot Act of July 13, 1990.
Before the law was passed, ‘anti-Semitic incidents’ conveniently surfaced in a cemetery in Carpentras where Jewish graves were desecrated, according to a massive propaganda campaign, ‘inspired by revisionist writings’.
Rabbi Sirat also is the Director-Founder of the Unesco Chair “Reciprocal Knowledge of the religions of the Book and teaching of Peace”. Just as in Britain and Denmark, the Jewish organizations rather join forces with islamic organizations and hold dialogues with islamists than solidarizing themselves with organizations which represent the indigenous populations, this goes for Rabbi Sirat as well.
Breaking the law is punished by heavy fines and jail time. A peculiar detail is that the heavy fines in the 10,000 Euro range often are handed out to the ‘injured party’; the organization or organizations who filed the complaint. This means that there is direct financial gain to be had for the ‘anti racist’, and most often Jewish organizations for accusing and persecuting people for ‘thought crimes’.
Under this law the French Nationalist Jean Marie Le Pen was fined 10,000 Euro’s and a suspended sentence of 3 month in jail, for having said only that the German occupation of France had not been especially inhumane, compared to the occupation of other countries such as Poland.
In France the courts try to avoid jail time when it comes to sentencing ‘holocaust deniers’ (everybody who says anything deemed improper by Jewish organizations) to avoid too much public uproar and sympathy for the victims, and prefers to break down dissidents financially and socially, by heavy fines, stripping people of their jobs, impounding of possessions, and a whole arsenal of chicaneries, such as searches and repeated police interviews.
The French politician and member of the European Parliament Bruno Maigret was fired from his job as a professor at the University of Lyon, stripped from his titles, and ordered to pay a fine of about 5.000 Euro and ‘compensation’ of 50.000 Euro to Jewish organizations, for having argued for free historical research, without having mentioned, doubted or denied specifics, like the number of Jewish victims of ‘the holocaust’ or the existance of gaschambers.
Law to cover up social unrest and the failure of multiculturalism
A law has been passed in March 2007, which criminalizes everybody but accredited reporters from the press when filming or photographing episodes of civil unrest, like the much publicized riots in the suburbs of French cities, where immigrant youth aided by criminal immigrant gangs torched thousands of cars and other property and engaged in fights with the police.
This law was promoted by the French president Nicolas Sarkozy, son of Hungarian / Jewish immigrants. The purpose of this law is obviously to enable the French government to remain in control of the media coverage, and if necessary downplay the seriousness of the violent incidents in the ‘banlieux’; the immigrant ghetto’s in the suburbs in order not to jeopardize the ‘multicultural’ ideal.
Sarkozy wanted to lay guilt trip on innocent children
The same Sarkozy has proposed that all 10 year old school children should ‘adopt the memory’ of a Jewish child murdered during ‘the holocaust’. This proposal came under heavy criticism from the left wing senator Jean-Luc Melenchon, Gilles Moindrot, general secretary of the Union Snuipp-FSU, and a spokesperson of the childrens rights organization EMDH, but was supported by the Socialist Party leader Francois Hollande, who is also said to be of Jewish heritage1), and is married to Selegene Royal, Sarkozy’s socialist rival during the presidential elections.
Since 2007 also criticism of homosexuality resorts under the French hatespeech laws.
The Jewish organizations were a main obstacle for anti-immigrationalist Jean Marie Le Pen in the past. (e.g. LICRA, Ligue internationale contre le racisme et l’antisemitisme)
Jewish groups have similarly led the way in restricting speech in Britain.
In other places and times, I’m thinking particularly of America, Jewish groups in the first 70 years of the 20th Century led the fight to expand free expression.
There’s nothing inherent in Judaism and Jewish law to make Jews and Jewish groups take any particular side in the free speech divide. It all comes down to what is best for Jews at a particular time and place. In some times and places, more expression is good, and at other times and places, less expression is better for Jews.
Generally speaking, in the past 60 years in the Western world, Jewish groups (though less often in America) have been on the side of criminalizing hate speech. The Simon Wiesenthal Center is headquartered in America and it fights around the world to restrict the rights of people to criticize Jews (SWC calls it “hate speech”) and to punish such critics with great severity.
From Feb. 25, 2015:
France prepares for war against online hate speech
France’s government is looking to adopt a tough new stance on online racism, anti-Semitism and other hate speech that would allow authorities to shut down offending websites amid a recent rise in hate crimes in the country.
Justice Minister Christiane Taubira has said she will push for legal reforms that would help French authorities crack down on racism and anti-Semitism online in much the same way they do with paedophilia. The proposals include empowering French authorities to shut down websites hosting content that is deemed illicit without prior court approval.
“Crimes recognised in public spaces must also be recognised as such on the Internet,” Taubira told a French Jewish student group on Sunday, echoing other recent statements on combating terrorism. “Our challenge is to find the most appropriate responses, but we are determined to wage an unmerciful battle against racism and anti-Semitism on the Internet.”
The declaration of war against online hate speech has raised questions about possible violations of civil liberties and the curtailing of due process as France struggles to find a way forward after a wave of deadly violence and anti-Semitic hate crimes in the country…
Last week more than 250 tombs were vandalised by a group of teens at a Jewish cemetery in eastern France, sparking what appeared to be copycat acts in other non-Jewish cemeteries in Normandy and the Pyrenees in the following days.
Amid the compounding tensions, and real fears over the radicalisation of young people via the Internet, Taubira and other authorities want the legal means to counter racism, anti-Semitism and Islamist extremism on the web. But blocking ubiquitous online hate speech could be a thorny task for officials.
Some people are applauding France’s aggressive approach. The Simon Wiesenthal Center, an international rights group researching the Holocaust and hate crimes, says it has observed a steady rise in racist and anti-Semitic speech online since it began studying the phenomenon 20 years ago. The increase has been exponential since the advent of social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter.
“France’s efforts must be congratulated,” Shimon Samuels, who heads the center’s Europe office, told FRANCE 24. “If child pornography and paedophilia have no place on the Internet, if advertising for things like alcohol and tobacco are controlled because they are considered noxious to children, then what about hate?”
Samuels downplayed the dangers of curtailing free speech or privacy as a result of Taubira’s proposed reforms. He pointed out that nowhere are free speech laws an unlimited privilege, and that we constantly forfeit our right to privacy to online advertisers without batting an eye.
“I see this as a way of ultimately protecting civil liberties,” Samuels said. “Of course the measures need to work within the framework of the law, of course there has to be oversight so that they are not abused. A healthy debate is arising about freedoms, but that is part of democracy.”
It is unclear whether France will get what it wants from other countries and the Internet giants, with whom it has clashed in the past. In the meantime, it has launched an Internet site where citizens can report worrying content to police, and launched a multimedia campaign to expose the recruiting methods and myths used by jihadists.
Samuels and O’Loughlin agree that more also needs to be done on the education front.
Parents in both Jewish and Muslim communities need to be better informed about the kind of content children are encountering on the Internet, and be encouraged to have frank – even uncomfortable – discussions with them about what they see, said Samuels.
O’Laughlin said people who have become blasé about the vitriol they encounter regularly on the web need to be woken from that stupor and given the tools to identify and report online hate speech.
Justice Minister Christiane Taubira
Justice Minister Christiane Taubira looks like just the type of person I want determining what information I can read and what I can say. I’m glad the Simon Wiesenthal Center is guiding her.