Great news!! - There you go, something to cheer you up on a Friday night. Now all we need is someone like him over here.
W00T!Let's get some of them judges over here.Ours know fuck all.Good on ya Geert!CR.
I'd put money on it that had this case happened here in the Muzzie colonised Is-fucking-lamic Republic of Britanniastan it would have been a totally different outcome....."Guilty as charged, that's 10 years sentence for the most heinous of Is-fuckin-lamophobic hate-fucking-crimes with no chance of parole" knowing how far advanced the cancerous scourge that is the Muzzie colonisation has become in this fucking shit hole third world immigrant-infested slum of a country! FUCK THE FUCKING FUCK OF AND DIE MUZZIE VERMIN CUNTS!!!!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1320815/Sheikh-Maulana-Abu-Sayeed-UK-sharia-law-leader-says-theres-thing-rape-marriage.htmlAnd another utterly example of the hideous Muzzie colonisation of Britain, this is NOT your country, you DON'T belong here, so just fuck off and die you fuck ugly bearded raghead of a Muzzie cunt!!!!
Exellent result - good sense prevails every now and then.However, if he's not already he ought to have someone watching his back for a while...
FUCKING A!ooops :-[ This may deserve a more considered response!
An eminently sensible result ..The case should never have been brought in the first place ..I would however agree totally with Caratacus .. the "losing side" in this case have "form" for taking direct action against those they perceive to be enemies .. or when they lose a reasonable argument ..I would have thought that Mr Wilders could find a couple of former RNLMC lads to watch his back ..
Right, now I have composed myself by having a swift bottle of wine, two roast pork sandwiches, walked the dog and prayed whilst not facing east. All matters which could get me stoned to death if certain people had there way. From what I have seen of Wilders work, it is emotive, but not racist. It is racist to suggest that some is inferior because of their race. it is legitimate to make a political point as forcefully as possible. Wilders merely said: there is a serious threat to the democratic process of western Europe and elsewhere posed by radical Islam. In which regard I think he is right, but in any event, even if I am wrong, is a legitimate point to make. The western liberal elite have become so dazed and confused by fears of being called racist that they turn savagely on anyone who raises the issue. Ironic, because they would be some of the first into the stoning pit. It was a disgrace that he was prosecuted in the first place.He will now have to have serious protection; after all, he has disagreed with the religion of peace! >:o
Britainistan definitely needs a 'Gert Wilders'! Anyone fancy the job?
Raping your wife isn't rape? WTF!
At last, a man refusing to do, think and speak as he's told (whilst hurting nobody, we should add) sees justice done that should never have needed to be done in the first place.Liberal Conspiracy and Lancaster Unity might be worth reading in the next day or so...
He already has bodyguards 24/7 - the religion of peace put a fatwah on him some time ago....
The unrelenting and ruthless suppression of freedom of speech of anyone who dares to speak out against mass Third World immigration and the evil cancer that is Islamification or the Neo-Stalinist Evil empire of the EUSSR is yet another hideous manifestation of the "Liberal" left political establishment brutal grip on power. Though be rest assured one day soon the entire treasonous, treacherous traitor leftie Lib/Lab/Con Bein Pensant Muzzie luvvie bought and paid for body politik will come crashing down before our eyes in a "Fall of the Berlin Wall" moment and we WILL take OUR country back, BRING ON THE REVOLUTION!!!!!!!
Being Dutch by birth and continued interest in that country & understanding that you're all intelectuals, I must say that I am utterly surprised at your positive comments today. The man is an intelligent yet narcistic nutter. One of his political programme's spear points was obligatory ETHNIC registration. And the minority Dutch government, which was [finally] established today, couldn't do without Wilders. They definitely disn't want to get him in, but need his polical support in the Parliament. How could he have been convicted today? That would have been the shortest serving time of a team of ministers in history ... ;)
I think you may make a fair point there, my son. Blessings be upon thee!G
Interesting point. I hadn't realised that at all .... the fragile minority government situation, I mean. Was just so relieved that the right to freedom of speech had been upheld for a change. Thank you for pointing out an alternative perspective ;)
Chatelaine - are you by any chance related to sixtypoundsaweekcleaner...?
I'll second and, more importantly, third that 'C' .....
"Corrugated Soundbite said...Liberal Conspiracy and Lancaster Unity might be worth reading in the next day or so..."No, they're *never* worth reading - they are both written and read exclusively by smug, self-righteous middle-clarse cunts who need stringing up from the nearest fucking lamp post.The cunts.Apart from this, I usually find that I agree with virtually everything Corrugated says....
"GrumpyOldTwat said...Britainistan definitely needs a 'Gert Wilders'! Anyone fancy the job?"Er, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't *this* guy doing a pretty good job of it ?http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article632884.eceI think he is, which is why I voted for him to represent me in the European Parliament.
<p>Spousal Rape : History of Exemption - Exemption? What the fuck! Rape is rape, surely. What the fuck is wrong with these people.</p>
"<span>A good start would be repealing the ban preventing from Wilders from entering the UK" < Jacqui 'snout in the trough' Smith was responsible for that, was she not?</span>
"<span>Can't find any sign of this wonderful [Geert Wilders] news in the UK media"</span><span> No fucking surprise there then .. but if he'd lost ... well, you can guess the rest </span><span> ;) </span>
Bonjour :) I am new here; no idea why my post appeared 3 times [honest, Miss].No idea neither what a sixtypoundaweekcleaner is ...Still need to precise the Wilders trial a bit: he has not been acquited from the charge yet. The prosecution has entered a "not guilty", but the judges - though not very likely - may think differently. We'll know in November.Wilders first action in Parliament [i have to stress again that he is not part of the government, but has promised to "tolerate" them - the only way to form a minority government after the last elections] was to attack a female minister, because she has a double nationality [Dutch & Swedish]. The prime minister and the vice premier have no problems with that, but he demands that she gives up her Swedish passport.Well done. You see, he really gets important things done. And has already forgotten what "tolerance" means.
It happened again ... :(
I have no idea why this [x3] happens, I think I need to put in a call to the "Echo Technical Helplne" (otherwise known as TheEye) and see if we can get to the bottom of it. It happens to 'Sixtypoundsaweekcleaner' too. (anyone ever seen them in the same room together?)
I dont know what you guys are about.But seeing that my 2nd post was triplicated again.And that my next comment [in duplicate] was posted as Anony Twat...Guys: I'm out of here.Bye.
Oh, geeze, I have to fill in my "name" again every time.Apologies.But still no explanation for the triplication.Wouldn't it be nice to have just one.Other life is calling. I bid you all good night.
It is now, but it wasn't. The argument was an analogy to contract law. The marriage was held to entail an on-going consent to sex. It followed that so long as a legal marriage stood, the husband could rely on that consent as a defence to rape. However, that was never part of statute law. It just kind of grew up. It was a custom which hardened in to law via a few cases. Hence it was a husband's exemption because it only applied to married men and only in respect of their own wives. So your girlfriend could complain to the cops but not your missus.The mullah is proposing something which is now definitely rejected. It shows the incompatibility between Sharia and English law. I agree with the general sentiments of BOTR that this shows an attempt to colonize English law. I just point out that if BOTR was thinking that we have never taken that view in law, then he's mistaken. 20 years ago the courts finally stopped agreeing with the mullah. Some people might say that the mullah is only arguing for a return to previous law.
That would make a most excellent post on it's own. Thanks for that WoaR. Explained in such a way that even I can understand it ;)
Apologies again Chatelaine, as I mentioned above, we're trying to get to the bottom of it. In the meantime you have the facility to delete the 2 extra posts after they appear ... if that helps for now.
Post a Comment