The Criminal Truth in Denmark

Editor’s note: Lars Hedegaard, a Danish critic of Islam, is on trial in Denmark for remarks he made regarding dysfunctions and abuse within Islamic family culture. Under Denmark’s law 266b dealing with alleged hate speech, defendants are not allowed to prove the truth of their comments and all that is needed for conviction is whether any one person feels offended. Below is Pat Condell standing up for the truth teller:

  • Trevor Blake

    I commend Front Page Magazine for linking to this video by atheist Pat Condell. I encourage FP readers to seek out his other videos.

  • jacob

    I wonder our abject media dares thinking what will happen if the Muslims in our
    midst ever achieve supremacy.
    Perhaps, used as they are to tow the line of governments like that of our present
    administration, it will be hunky-dory for them to live under SHARIA rule…which
    the way matters are going, is what can be seen in the horizon…

    interesting to see what this lawsuit is all about…
    It is not about justice :
    What a shame !!!!

  • JoergensenDK

    Hedegaard was just cleared from all charges.
    I have no idea where you guys are getting the idea that it should not matter under Danish legislation if your comments are true or not, and that simply one person has to be offended. Give me one, just one, example of such a case ever having been tried in Denmark – there is not a single one! But there is one currently running in Sweden.
    Denmark is the country where the Mohammed cartoons was first printed and since re-printed several times by all major news papers, and no-one has been charged with anything(obviously). (we are also losing more guys pr. capita in Afghanistan than the US. Know your friends!)

    Your coverage of this is sub-standard and deeply flawed. Anyone even mildly informed about Danish juridical affairs will write you off as unserious when reading these continuous embarrassing articles. But much more gravely: it misses the real points, which should actually be argued – that our prosecutors seem to be selective when deciding on cases etc. Also it is not intellectually satisfactory or fun reading this when there are so many juicy analysis to be made regarding this.

    • John Crawford

      The problem is not that he was cleared. The problem is that he was charged in the first place!

      • Ageofreason

        You are exactly right, John. JoergensenDK is self-righteously blowing smoke, and is focussed on the wrong issue. The post by Mr. Condell may be late, but what he says is nonetheless accurate, and needs to be heard. No doubt most readers are glad to hear that Mr. Hedegaard has been "cleared" of the charges, but that Denmark has laws that would place his future in jeopardy for speaking truth (as we have, also, in my country, Canada, sadly), is the real point. JoergensenDK's patriotism is misplaced. Here we have so-called "human rights tribunals" ruled over by petty punks, which (and who) are an absolute disgrace.

        • JoergensenDK

          No, you guys. I agree that he should not have been charged, they either did not do their homework or they are biased/appeasing etc. as he had a super defense. But still, the justice system is working – he was cleared, and we hardly ever have cases concerning hate speech. This is the legal process; cases are tried and through that it is established what is legal and what isn't. We have absolutely nothing like the situation in Canada. There seems to be a problem in the prosecutors office who just might be too susceptible to outside pressure, though, and I again suggest that you write about that, rather than forwarding unfounded speculations (wikileaks has stuff on them too).

          The fine he risked getting would have been less than 700 dollars. That would not affect his future in any way – maybe his weekend.

          I object to the handling of facts by frontpagemag in this case. If they are simply about trashing whoever they stumble upon, then fine, have your fight club, but they will lose the respect of a lot of people and with that their chance to influence the debate (which is sorely needed.). They need to get someone knowledgeable about Scandinavia to write these articles – or not write them at all(if they want to be considered as a serious publication, that is). I suspect that this is unintended as they usually have a very high standard – our languages are only accessible to very few and so incredibly few people are both sufficiently informed about the legislative issues, reads frontpagemag, can and bothers to communicate it to them etc.

          I have no way of checking from what material they mis-translated/interpreted their claims about Danish legislation without a link – and no serious answers seem to appear(i assume for the reason that no such link exists), but it simply is not correct. (but much of it is correct about Sweden, so do the real, urgent story, rather than the non-existent one!)

          After all, freedom of speech just won a nice victory here, and Denmark passed the test! Who can blame me for being a bit patriotic over here :)

  • Waldemar

    I quite often visit Europe and find the political spectrum there and the press to be Left, Far Left and Loony Left and nothing else. Antisemitism, antiamericanism and proIslamism are the "In" things. Two decades ago it was almost the same except that proSovietism was In. So it comes as no surprise that those poor souls there think along the lines demonstrated by our friend from Denmark. What does come as a surprise is the existence of the Last Mohicans like Hedegaard, Geert Wilders or Pat Caddel. Canada is almost there, too, and the Good, OLd USA is fast catching up.

    Let's Allah have mercy on us, Kuffars.

    • JoergensenDK

      It is not a matter of what I think – the coverage is simply incorrect, hopefully due to lack of proper translation.
      What is the game here – raising a debate about ultra important issues, which might cost us our very civilization if not countered or simply an uninformed mud-fight? What is the point of getting all worked up about something that is incorrect and not bringing the real issues out in the light? This is not serious debating. You need to take in sound arguments or your online communities will decay into an absurdity leaving the real playing field to the loony left-wingers and the islamists. Bad strategy, my friend.

      Do you guys want to protect frontpage from critique so that it will never have a chance to better itself? I am still waiting for a link to anything substantiating the claims. Anything. anybody?
      If no-one can produce such a link, I think you should call it a day, and celebrate the victory instead. We are, over here.

      • guest

        calm down, you are a nit picking perfectionist. the core issue here is the danger of religious zealotry and the generally wimpish knee buckled response of the west in face of this creeping imperialism of islam. this is the core issue and i am sure this site will take critique if it is of a significant nature and directly relevant to the basic issue and not a secondary issue such as danish/ swedish/ canadian etc justice and laws sorry to tell you that your may be fully correct but it is irrelevant to the heart of the matter under scrutiny. good luck

        • JoergensenDK

          Yup, I am all against factual errors. Go ahead, call me a perfectionist then!

          If you want anyone to take you serious when debating any core issue, you need to get the facts right. You might not personally care about such matters, but a critical amount of people do, and thus the potential, for example, for frontpagemag to raise money may be damaged if they persists with this gravely flawed coverages off entire countries. Maybe they lack in good judgment or are unable to attract good bloggers. In any way – it may hurt their stanidng.

          Denmark has one of the strictest immigration legislation in Europe, we have a well established party critiquing Islam which have formed part of our goverment's parliamentary majority for over a decade. They are working continuously to fix our legislation to meet the challenges which I believe we agree about. This situation is the same across the Western world. Also we have fought in Iraq and still in Afghanistan with as much popular support as the American troops have.

          Now, the interesting case is the limitation European human rights legislation put us under. That we are not allowed to limit immigration from Turkey because of an arrangement with the EC – which the US has pushed massively for Europe to sign…super interesting core issues we could be debating in stead of factual errors.

  • RiverFred

    Islam is a political religion. It makes the attainment of political goals (the entire world must submit to Allah) a religious duty. The goals of Islam is waging Jihad by gaining concessions. Just the fact that this trial took place is Jihad.

  • waterwillows

    One thing that is daily becoming more apparent, is how Islam has forced the evil that lies deep in the heart of western leaders to come forth and show itself. Their grovelling spectacles of appeasement and practiced deception on their own people is telling.
    I think Islam has a way of showing the worst in mankind for all to witness.
    But a hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and waters shall overflow the hiding place, And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with the netherworld shall not stand; When the scouring scourge shall pass through, Then you shall be trodden down by it.

  • RD1953

    Of ALL the nations on the earth, Denmark, along with Belgium, France, the former Czech Republic, Austria, and others, should KNOW better than to fall for this "Hate Speech", "Multiculturalism" SCAM!!!

    They lived under the steel hammer of the Third Reich!!! They lived censorship, politically correct speech, and all the other repressive ideologies of the fringe left under both Communism and Fascism!!! (Both branches off the same tyrannical tree!!!!!


    • wsk

      They forgot because they were too busy feeling superior to the U.S.

  • Reason_For_Life

    JoergensenDK has an error in his post regarding 266 (b). There is more involved than a simple fine:

    Article 266b

    "Any person who, publicly or with the intention of disseminating it to a wide circle of people, makes a statement, or other communication threatening, insulting or degrading a group of persons on account of their race, colour, national or ethnic origin or a belief shall be liable to a fine or simple detention, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years. "

    That doesn't sound like losing a weekend does it?


    Go to Google Books and look up "International Law Reports" by Lauterpacht, Greenwood and Oppenheimer then go to page 36.

    Denmark has several statutes under which insults can be prosecuted 266 (b) is only one of them. This is typical of European countries where free speech as a true right (as opposed to a permission) has never existed. The United States is the only, repeat the only, country that acknowledges the right of free speech and actively promotes and protects it.

    Fortunately, because of the horrible vagueness of this moronic statute the Danish authorities are considering changing this law. Whether it gets better or worse, however, is an open question.

    • JoergensenDK

      For a first offense only a fine can come into consideration. In Denmark there has never been a prison sentence on this – lots of our statutes have the option for prison sentences but are never used. Generally we have extremely light sentencing (for better and worse). To know what the law of the land is one must look at what the courts do – and they only give out fines even for serious repeat offenders in this case (we had one guy who followed a neighbor of color around and shouted very degrading racial stuff after him – he got fined too, in the end). I am actually right about this.

      Also we never had a case of someone stating something truthful (for example about how Mohammed conducted himself) and being convicted – there are statements like that every week in our news papers (we are a small country, so not daily).

      The Danish government probably would have tightened the law to make it less vague, but under European human rights law is seens we are not free to do that. Luckily our courts are (still) very sensible.