A Bill of First Amendment Protection and Redress

05 November 2010

EuropeNews 4 November 2010 Speech to the Jewish Defence League in Toronto, October 1, 2010 By Lars Hedegaard, President of The International Free Press Society

Thank you, JDL for seeing us here in Toronto. If you have difficulties telling the two Larses apart, I'm the one from Denmark. Vilks is from Sweden. The difference between us is that I will deliver a serious sermon, and Vilks will tell all the jokes. That's the way the official playground has been organized here.

Let me start by talking about the new world order we're living under. Here's an item that I read today in the Danish newspaper Politiken. It talks about the recent Swedish elections that took place on September 19th this year.

A new party called The Sweden Democrats, which is critical of Islam and immigration, managed – for the first time – to get enough votes to enter parliament, despite the fact that all the other parties had labelled it 'racist', 'right-wing extremist' or downright 'Nazi', which of course it is not. Everything was done to prevent people from voting for the SD. The Conservative Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt even refused to distance himself from threats of violence against the party.

Shortly after the election, the SD's electronic archives were broken into, and the names of thousands of members and supporters were stolen. Now, a criminal gang of Muslim immigrants known as “Original Gangsters” (that's what they call themselves) has subsequently started publishing names and addresses of elected SD politicians on its website. Several of these politicians have received anonymous threats, and many have felt compelled to step down and leave politics.

The “Original Gangster” leader, who is obviously either a left-wing supporter of Islam or a Swedish convert and whose name is also – sorry to say – Lars, Lars Bergquist, explains – and listen now – explains to the Swedish daily Aftonbladet that it is his dream that every elected SD representative will step down. Here it is (quote): “Personally I think it is a good thing if they feel scared, and we're used to having it our way," says Mr. Bergquist. That is the state of affairs in Sweden right now. And this is supposed to be a democracy.

I think by now a sufficient number of citizens in the West know what is at stake, and I think little can be gained by holding yet another conference on the nature of Islam or Islamic history or publishing yet another book on this ideology in addition to the many hundreds already in circulation. I have nothing against more conferences and more books, but I think we need something different.

We know that Islam is supremacist, imperialist, genocidal, and anti-semitic. We know it's bent on world domination, we know what Islam as an ideology thinks of Christians, and Jews, and Hindus, Buddhists, and anyone else – they even hate each other, and when they're through killing us, they will start killing each other, as we see in various countries like Iraq.

Let me quote to you from this wonderful book (Al-Yahud). It's a good one. It's written by Elias Al-Maqdisi, who was a high-ranking aide to the PLO before he converted to Christianity. Of course it's not his real name, it means “From Jerusalem”. The other author is my good friend Sam Solomon, who started his life as a Shariah lawyer, I believe in Sudan, and is now an ardent Christian.

This is what they found out. You know, Muslims pray, if they are good Muslims, they pray five times a day. And this is what they say in their prayers:

Guide us to the straight path, the path of those whom you favoured with guidance, not [the path] of those against whom there is wrath. Nor those who are astray.

Now the point is that “those against whom there is wrath” are universally understood to be the Jews. And those "who are astray" are the Christians. So this is the state of tolerance and respect for other people that is ingrained and lies at the bottom of Islam. This is what they say five times a day if they're good Muslims.

I think we have to make a distinction here. Some people talk about so-called 'moderate' Islam, including a good friend of mine, who has the idea that there is such as thing. And I certainly hope that we shall one day meet 'moderate' Islam. It hasn't happened yet. They have had 1400 years to develop this 'moderate' Islam. It does not exist as I speak here.

What we can see around us are moderate Muslims, that's a different thing. Islam as such is radical, it is, as I explained, supremacist, imperialist, genocidal and anti-semitic. Luckily, there are some Muslims who are not very obedient, Muslims who would like to live in a civilized manner with the rest of us. They, however, do not call the shots. I think they are as much victims of this crazy, totalitarian ideology akin to Nazism and Stalinism – I won't even call it a religion – as the rest of us.

You cannot have peace with Islam. It is impossible to have peace with a religion or an ideology with a holy book called the Koran and whatever we know about the ways and expressions of the prophet. As Israel demonstrates, you can have a sort of peace with Egypt, you can have a sort of peace with Jordan, but these self-installed governments do not speak for Islam. You cannot have peace with the radicals in Egypt, nor can you have it with the radicals in Jordan. Until Islam is reformed, I'm afraid I'll have to say that it will be eternal war until one of us wins this war, or until we surrender.

Let me tell you about conditions in my home country, Denmark. Just yesterday, the national police sent out, I think, the most distinct warning I've seen. What they said was that we've lost control of parts of our cities where a parallel legal system is now reigning, i.e. of course the Shariah law. The Danish police caught a few guys in one of the Muslim ghettos who had, by wielding knife, stolen 40,000 Danish kroner ($7,000), which is a lot of money. They had forced this woman to hand over the money, and they were arrested and accused.

But then the elders of the community stepped in and said: "Well, we can sort this out." The robbers pay back the money, and you drop the charges against these guys. So there is a different legal system in control there. What happened was: The police had to release the perpetrators, and the state had to pay them compensation for illegal arrest, some 20,000 kroner. This was a win-win situation, but a lose-lose situation for Denmark.

The situation for Jews in Denmark, I'd say, is grave indeed. As I explained on the Michael Coren Show, there are schools in central Copenhagen where Jewish kids cannot attend. Not because it's illegal, but because their principal would advise: "Do not send them here because we cannot guarantee their safety." There is one Jewish school on the outskirts of Copenhagen. It is surrounded by a fence, three meters high, with security guards, electronic control systems etc. This is the state of affairs in our country.

Right next door in Malmö, Sweden, half of the Jewish population has left, because they are not secure. I mean, we're talking about the countries that became famous during the Second World War for having saved their Jews. Now we're giving them up. We cannot protect them.

The funny thing is that the ex-chief rabbi of Denmark, Bent Melchior, is in the cahoots with the so-called "victims of Danish racism". He keeps making excuses for those who attack people like me for being "right-wing", "extremist", and what not. I mean, with friends like those, who needs enemies?

Of course, you know the American Constitution's First Amendment that guarantees free speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, etc. We need to extend these First Amendment protections to Western Europe and right here in Canada, and it is also important that we abolish all these blasphemy and 'hate speech' laws.

By the way, I'm being dragged into court in January for being a well-known racist and 'hate speecher'. It is important that we get rid of them for they are not being equally applied. Imams can say anything they want, but if we say anything strange, we will be dragged into court.

There's a famous Danish imam, Abdul Wahid Pedersen – Pedersen of course because he used to be called something else – but after a conviction for drug trafficking and a jail sentence, he went over to Muhammad.

He's considered to be a moderate Muslim, and his moderation is illustrated by the fact that he is out saying that of course we – he's sad to say– have to kill those who leave Islam. Apostates have to be killed. He's sorry about that, but it says so in the book. He is also sad to have to report that loose women have to be stoned to death. Nothing he can do about that, it's gods will. He is also said that when Muslims become numerous enough, of course they will introduce Shariah law and get rid of our Constitution and democracy. This is considered very moderate in my country. Nobody is pulling a hair out of his nose for such remarks.

But if I say I want to defend our democracy, I want to point out the defects of Islam, and why I don't like it, then I'm a radical.

It is not enough that we abolish blasphemy and hate speech laws or get some abstract First Amendment protection. In my view, we have to put new legal instruments in place that will strengthen the rights of the citizens and allow citizens to defend themselves.

I'm not a lawyer, but I tried this morning to write a few thoughts about what I think could be a fruitful approach

In most Western countries, the citizens do not have the right to bear arms. They have that right in the US, but you don't have it in Canada, and we certainly do not have it in Denmark. Why not? We used to have arms when we were Vikings. Not a gun but an axe or something similar. We gave it away in the 13th century because of an understanding between the citizens and the King. The citizens would refrain from taking the law into their own hands, but the State would uphold the law for all. That was the deal. There is a French expression for this deal, le contrat social, the social contract.

Now, if the State does not protect its citizens, according to that social contract, then the citizens should have the right to sue the state for not upholding its obligations to protect our freedoms, to protect our personal security, to protect our property. And politicians who do not uphold it, or the state that doesn't should of course pay through their noses. And they should be punished, and removed from office.

Secondly, anyone who issues threats in order to undermine First Amendment rights, or who seeks to prevent others from exercising these rights, should be held financially responsible for whatever security precautions these threats and attempts have necessitated. In other words, they should be financing the JDL, because the Canadian state will not allow us to speak freely without threats.

If the person issuing such threats, or trying to undermine First Amendment rights, enjoys the hospitality of a foreign state, that host state shall be held financially, legally and politically accountable for whatever harm its charge may have caused or inspired. And, if such threats are issued or condoned by the government of a foreign state, that state's assets should be frozen and confiscated, and sanctions should be imposed.

Attempts to undermine the First Amendment rights of any citizen shall be regarded as a crime against the State and tantamount to High Treason. If issued or condoned by a foreign state, it should be considered an act of war.

These are some of the things we could do, we could demand. I'll discuss some of these ideas with my colleagues, both in Denmark, in Canada and internationally. We may organize a conference on this thing. We may end up calling it "A Bill of First Amendment Protection and Redress". That sounds good and I think we'll fix it somehow.

But first and foremost my message would be: Get organized, which I'm glad you've already done. Do not surrender, because surrender is not an option. Thank you.