The Geert Wilders trial

[CountArach]

Due to there being new advances in the trial, I will allow this thread to re-open, but I want everyone to understand the following conditions:

1) Moderators will take a zero tolerance policy to anything even close to racism and personal attacks on members.

2) The discussion must be limited to progress of the trial and the implications of it.

3) The discussion shall not touch on Wilders' personal background, unless it is relevant to the above discussion. This has already been discussed to death in this thread and is the reason for many of the borderline posts.

4) Any future locking of this thread will not be reversed, unless there is a very good reason for it.

So play nice everyone and have a good, clean discussion.

[The Wizard]

Alright, I'll take a shot across the bow, so to say. I think it's right and proper they won't allow Wilders to parade a whole procession of nutty Islam-haters in court. He's trying to make this into a show trial himself, how ridiculous is that?

[Fragony]

Thx CA,

Here is the thing, there has been a rather unexpected turn of events that leaves a dirty taste. Of the 18 witnesses called upon for Wilders defense, including Islamic scholars, jihadi's (van Gogh's murderer) Imam's and whatever, 15 have been rejected by the court, which is pretty much unheard of. I never believed this was really a trial but it's scary how much it's in the open that it isn't really a trial. I am less optimistic about a good outcome then I was before, whatever will come out of it Wilders will get bigger, but I am starting to feel cornered this is just grim.

He's trying to make this into a show trial himself, how ridiculous is that?

He never asked for it, something with butt and blisters.

[Hax]

Wilders, I think, believes that freedom of speech is something that exists only exclusively for people who agree with him. That's not how it works, obviously.

[Fragony]

Wilders, I think, believes that freedom of speech is something that exists only exclusively for people who agree with him. That's not how it works, obviously.

This is what you wanted Haxie, but a theological discussion apparently isn't allowed, a little consistency would be nice. Everybody should have seen it coming that it would be the Islam itself that would be on trial, but they didn't, that amazes me.

[Subotan]

Wilders, I think, believes that freedom of speech is something that exists only exclusively for people who agree with him. That's not how it works, obviously.

Exactly.

[Fragony]

I find that very ironic, it's the exact other way around, who's on trial.

edit, this is only of any use for dutch speakers http://www.elsevier.nl/web/Nieuws/Po...lamkenners.htm

But this is getting very interesting. Might not realize it yet but this is pretty big, no less then a religion of millions is on trial.

We are in trouble, jihadi's arent going to take this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xohI...layer_embedded

This is much more interesting then I thought it would be.

[Subotan]

Agreed with her up until 1:15. There is nothing exclusively inherent to Islam which gives it those qualities anymore than there is to Christianity.

[Ser Clegane]

Due to there being new advances in the trial, I will allow this thread to re-open, but I want everyone to understand the following conditions:

1) Moderators will take a zero tolerance policy to anything even close to racism and personal attacks on members.

2) The discussion must be limited to progress of the trial and the implications of it.

3) The discussion shall not touch on Wilders' personal background, unless it is relevant to the above discussion. This has already been discussed to death in this thread and is the reason for many of the borderline posts.

4) Any future locking of this thread will not be reversed, unless there is a very good reason for it.

So play nice everyone and have a good, clean discussion.

I do not think that condition 2) is still met and we are at least on the line to fail on condition 1)

Time to close this.

Thanks for the contributions