ESW at Trykkefrihedsselskabet

Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff spoke yesterday at a conference sponsored by IFPS at Trykkefrihedsselskabet (the Danish Free Press Society) in Copenhagen.

Below is a video recording of her speech, followed by a very interesting question and answer session. One of the more intriguing questions is raised by the Dutch author Arthur Legger, who suggests that it is time for an international pooling of legal talent — a Europe-wide consortium of lawyers — to fight the EU’s “hate speech” laws.

Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for uploading this video. The sound is a bit peculiar, because it has been adjusted to filter out the background noise. Vlad says he is working to improve it:

The text of Elisabeth’s speech is here. The video above departs only slightly from the prepared text, but the Q&A is obviously not included at all.

Previous posts about the hate speech case against Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff:

2009   Dec   5   Fighting a Hate Speech Charge in Austria
        11   Heckling the Counterjihad
        14   Whose Law?
        17   Defaming the Muslims of Pinkafeld
2010   Mar   11   A Mother and an Activist
        20   An Austrian “Hate School”
        22   Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff at the Freedom Defense Initiative
        29   Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff and the Wiener Akademikerbund
    Sep   9   “Islam is a Political Ideology Disguised as a Religion”
        16   “Justice Must Not Be Made the Handmaiden of Sharia”
        17   The Truth Does Not Matter
    Oct   11   Interview With Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff
        16   Is the Truth Illegal in Austria?
        20   A Court Date for Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff
        21   BPE Press Release on Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff
        22   Elisabeth’s Voice: An Appeal
        23   Elisabeth’s Voice: A Follow-Up
        24   Raising Our Voices
        25   Elisabeth’s Voice is Growing
        27   Elisabeth’s Voice: More Information
        27   A Bit More Media Attention?
        28   We Are Elisabeth’s Voice
        30   Elisabeth’s Voice in Amsterdam
        31   Mark Steyn Joins Elisabeth’s Voice
    Nov   2   Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff: Target of Western Shariah
        6   Anatomy of a Discussion with a Leftist Journalist
        8   ESW in the WSJ
        10   “The Left is Very Much the New Far Right”
        11   Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff Versus the State of Denial
        17   Elisabeth’s Voice: An Update
        15   The New English Review Interviews Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff
        20   Live-Blogging the Trial of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff
        20   The ESW Defense File
        23   The Trial of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, Day 1
        27   The Time That is Given Us

5 thoughts on “ESW at Trykkefrihedsselskabet

  1. The only reason that Muslims are allowed into western countries is because almost all westerners have not read the Quran.

    Hopefully the work that Elisabeth is doing will help educate the mostly clueless Americans and Europeans.

  2. Ms Wolff’s command of English is excellent. She should be doing a speaking tour here in the U.S. and probably will after she beats these sitz charges.

    Would the English let her into England?

  3. Brava, Elisabeth! Brava! We kufr are all more than fortunate to have someone so eloquent and well-versed speaking upon our behalf.

    Your use of the word “despicable” was spot on!

  4. This is from the EU Constitution:

    “ARTICLE II-70
    Freedom of thought, conscience and religion
    1. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right includes freedom to change religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or in private, to manifest religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.”

    “ARTICLE II-71
    Freedom of expression and information
    1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.”

    Perhaps the principle of abrogation applies, or perhaps the word “everyone” has a different meaning there.

Comments are closed.