Fined €300 for Quoting the Koran

An article today on reports that a man was convicted of “belittling religious teachings” for what is essentially no more than quoting or summarizing Islamic scriptures.

Our Austrian correspondent ESW summarizes the case, based on the ORF report:

This occurred in a local court, under Austrian law (not EU law). A 43-year-old man was accused of belittling religious teachings and received a suspended sentence of €300. “Suspended” means that he does not have to pay the fine if he does not repeat the offense.

The defendant — who is a teacher and may lose his job — received the sentence because he wrote online under a pseudonym that “the Quran is a book of lies” and “the Muslims are the enemies of the Christians, and they (the Muslims) killed 200 Jews single-handedly.”

He added that he wanted to show and explain that the teachings of this religious group have never been scrutinized since its legal recognition by the Austrian state in 1912.

His expressed view of Islam was, however, vehemently disapproving. Here’s a direct translation of a sample of what he wrote online:

– – – – – – – –

Islam was and always has been a “sect” for idiots. There is only one solution: Islam must no longer be legally recognized as a religious group. This damned Islam with its godawful double standards must be prohibited. Pedophiles and killers must be brought to justice. To all supporters of Islam (I say): Read this book of lies, the Quran, with all its contradictions. It is definitely not a direct transcription of the Holy Book. Some suras were eaten by Mohammad’s pets. If you glorify Mohammed so much, why don’t you all f**k camels like he did? Or aren’t you doing that already?

The defendant sat in the courtroom wearing a shirt with “Austria” written in large letters. He held a German-language copy of the Quran in his hands and quoted from it.

“I am not a Nazi,” he said. “I am a patriot.”

Incitement could not be proven. [Until the next time — ESW]

This is additional evidence — as if we needed it — that free speech does not exist in Austria, and that the country is rapidly being officially and legally Islamized.

The information the man cited can be sourced directly from the Koran. It doesn’t belittle religious teachings. It is the religious teachings.

It appears, however, that in Austria, just as in the UK, the truth is no longer a valid defense.

So now it’s official: Islam is “belittled” by accurate reporting on its core doctrines as laid out explicitly in the Koran.

The imams can stand up in the mosques on Fridays and declaim the same information, and it’s no problem. But don’t you dare to do it, or you may find yourself at the tender mercies of Austrian “justice”.

5 thoughts on “Fined €300 for Quoting the Koran

  1. I wish people would stop harping about “free-speech”, it’s got nothing to do with “free-speech” because “free-speech” is a non-ontological abstraction that describes nothing about what people are fighting over. The Liberal leviathan is criminalising the reality about Islam because it means they have a deadly enemy in their midst and they have to do terrible things to avert the threat. The liberals can’t deal with this, they are catatonic with fear, and hope that it will go away by not talking about it.

  2. Islam needs to be banned in Europe, there’s no doubt about it. If it were possible for it to remain, as other religions do, a passive institution, it would be workable.

    As it stands, it does not live in harmony with other religions or cultures!

  3. It appears, however, that in Austria, just as in the UK, the truth is no longer a valid defense.

    This represents the ultimate erosion of human liberty.

    If the state wishes to have a monopoly on the administration of justice, then it must be just in its actions and policies.

    For every right reason the truth has always been the best defense in a court of law. Remove that fundamental safety net and law becomes something that is interpreted in any which way by whomever sits on the bench.

    If the truth is not admissable evidence then anything can be substituted for it with equal validity. This renders justice arbitrary and delegitimizes the state.

    There is no more sure way than this of abdicating the state’s right to enforce the Social Contract. With that abdication there also disappears the state’s monopoly over the control of violence.

    These are guaranteed steps towards anarchy and civil war.

  4. Zenster said…

    law becomes something that is interpreted in any which way by whomever sits on the bench.

    I do not know WHERE you are from. But that comment shows how little you know of MOST law.

    ALL law is “interpretted” to fit with the case. That is why barristers in Britain, Australia, and all th other colonies are paid FORTUNES to find what various judges have said on an issue, or how they have interpreted different cases.

    German law is similar, as I believe is U.S law.

    Von Brandenburg-Preußen.

  5. Furor Teutonicus: ALL law is “interpretted” to fit with the case.

    America is plagued by judges who feel that they are entitled to interpret the law. Proper judicial enforcement relies upon correct application of constitutional law. This nation’s constitution is sufficiently well-written whereby it is largely unnecessary for judges to take it upon themselves to “interpret” the law of our land.

    Of course, none of this seems to prevent them from doing so, but close examination will show that those judges who most vigorously “interpret” constitutional law are usually those who abet and facilitate crime or malfeasance.

    To this very day, I remain dumbfounded that America’s Founding Fathers managed to contrive a document so durable and pertinent some two centuries after its penning, that there is little to be changed in it at present.

    How sad it is that there are so many members of the judiciary that feel otherwise.

Comments are closed.