Pakistan: Trial Starts For Christian Couple Accused of Insulting Islam and Its "Proph

[busybody..]

Pakistan: Trial Starts For Christian Couple Accused of Insulting Islam and Its "Proph

Pakistan:


Nope, not Pakistan,

BRITIAN begins Trial Starts For Christian Couple Accused of Insulting Islam and Its "Prophet" Mohammed...



Insanity.....

Christian hotel owners Ben and Sharon Vogelenzang go on trial today for comments they made about Islam.

The couple, who own the Bounty House Hotel in Liverpool, are being prosecuted for a religiously aggravated public disorder after a Muslim guest complained they had made offensive comments to her on March 20.

They allegedly described Muslim dress for women as “bondage” and described the Prophet Mohammed as a “warlord”.

Their legal defence is being funded by the Christian Institute. Its director Colin Hart is appealing to Christians to pray for the couple as they stand before Liverpool Magistrates' Court today and tomorrow.

“We believe that it is the first case of its kind in the UK and could have significant implications for the religious freedom of all Christians,” he said.

Christian Institute spokesman Mike Judge said previously that there were “significant free speech and religious liberty issues at stake”.

 

[off2bed]

Religiously aggravated public disorder

"The Act introduced the civil remedy called the 'Anti-Social Behaviour Order' or 'ASBO'. These orders are made against people who have engaged in anti-social behaviour which in the United Kingdom is defined as 'conduct which caused or was likely to cause alarm, harassment, or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as him or herself and where an ASBO is seen as necessary to protect relevant persons from further anti-social acts by the Defendant'." Hey Seanh, that's you.

"Unlawful wounding or inflicting grievous bodily harm and assault occasioning actual bodily harm

Section 29(1)(a) creates the distinct offence of racially or religiously aggravated wounding or infliction of bodily harm. A person is guilty of this offence if he commits an offence under section 20 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 (see grievous bodily harm) which is racially or religiously aggravated within the meaning of section 28.... bla bla bla."

That won't stop Muslims from blowing up Brits.

 

[Karen Kraft]

Pakistan:


Nope, not Pakistan,

BRITIAN begins Trial Starts For Christian Couple Accused of Insulting Islam and Its "Prophet" Mohammed...



Insanity.....

Christian hotel owners Ben and Sharon Vogelenzang go on trial today for comments they made about Islam.

The couple, who own the Bounty House Hotel in Liverpool, are being prosecuted for a religiously aggravated public disorder after a Muslim guest complained they had made offensive comments to her on March 20.

They allegedly described Muslim dress for women as “bondage” and described the Prophet Mohammed as a “warlord”.

Their legal defence is being funded by the Christian Institute. Its director Colin Hart is appealing to Christians to pray for the couple as they stand before Liverpool Magistrates' Court today and tomorrow.

“We believe that it is the first case of its kind in the UK and could have significant implications for the religious freedom of all Christians,” he said.

Christian Institute spokesman Mike Judge said previously that there were “significant free speech and religious liberty issues at stake”.

This coming from England, where the native language used to be English, one would think the drafters of the statute would understand the way in which one word "modifies" another in what used to be the mother tongue. Would not, at an earlier time and in a less PC place, the adverb "religiously" modify the verb [to aggravate], suggesting that the insults allegedly directed toward the guests were directed in a religious manner? ... that the accused persons mustered religious fervor in their acts of aggravation?

Or did the drafters mean to say that the aggravating comments, being directed toward the intended target(s') religion was the basis for the offending conduct being proscribed?

Or do they have WOPS, WAHs and WOGS writing their codes these days?

Just curious.

 

[off2bed]

It's a living document.

 

[Karen Kraft]

It's a living document.

You mean to say they only wanted their guests to felafel?

 

[busybody..]

Religiously aggravated public disorder



That won't stop Muslims from blowing up Brits.

But if you say

that

YOU WILL BE PROSECUTED

 

[busybody..]

"A Normal Warrington Girl Who Liked The Beatles" [Mark Steyn]


Here are some snapshots of a society in very rapid transformation. First, by immigration:

Record Level Of British Population Is Foreign-Born

Second, by the higher fertility rates of those immigrants:

The proportion of children born here to foreign mothers has also hit a new high.

Some 24 per cent of the births in England and Wales last year – or 170,834 – were to mothers born outside the country.

Third, by marriage and conversion:

The former Roman Catholic from Warrington, who converted to Islam last year, gave evidence after swearing an oath to Allah and kissing the Koran.

The lady in question was testifying in the trial of her hoteliers:

Prosecutor Anya Horwood told the court Mr Vogelenzang, 53, called the prophet Mohammed a "warlord" and likened him to Saddam Hussein and Hitler.

And his 54-year-old wife told Mrs Tazi her Islamic dress represented "oppression" and was a form of "bondage", the court heard.

t is not clear to me why the above statements should be against the law, or why one should be required to defend them in court. But, if you look at the deference the state is willing to extend to Islam now and then pitch it ahead a decade or two, after more immigration, more births, more "reversions", one would not be sanguine about the long-term prospects of ancient English liberties.

Nonetheless, complacency remains the order of the day. Anne Applebaum thinks we underestimate the appeal of "the very mildness of modern Europe" - or, as I call it, the vast gaping nullity of the multiculti state. Responding to an NR column of mine, Oliver Kamm in The Times of London professes to be "in favour of a vast gaping nullity".

The problem, as he'll live to see, is that that's only a transitional phase.

 

[off2bed]

You mean to say they only wanted their guests to felafel?

I know what it's called that. After eating it, you feel awful.

 

[mark197205]

Colour me suprised that busybozo hasnt commented on the fact that this case was throw out after two days...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/8404212.stm

 

[busybody..]

Colour me suprised that busybozo hasnt commented on the fact that this case was throw out after two days...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/8404212.stm

read it

tell me

are you happy with what you read?

I did

The couple was on TRIAL for saying, YES, SPEAKING!!!!!!!!!!

That now is a problem in your useless cuntry

Only because no one else could back up the MOOSECUNTS allegations it was thrown out

 

[mark197205]

read it

tell me

are you happy with what you read?

I did

The couple was on TRIAL for saying, YES, SPEAKING!!!!!!!!!!

That now is a problem in your useless cuntry

Only because no one else could back up the MOOSECUNTS allegations it was thrown out

I never said I was happy with it, its a case of he said, she said that should never have been brought to trial.

 

[busybody..]

I never said I was happy with it, its a case of he said, she said that should never have been brought to trial.

that it was

IS A PROBLEM

 

[busybody..]

England: Lets talk Sen Wide Stance....Or Palin home remodel

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You Know What UK Politicians Can't Call Islamic Fundamentalists? Islamic Fundamentalists...Know What They Can't Call Muslim Jihadists? Muslim Jihadists.


That would be like us not using the words 'embarrassing', 'ignorant', 'thieving', 'unethical', 'socialist', 'bowing apologist' when describing POTUS.

JAWA: The politically correct guide to not offending Muslims.

Creeping Sharia: MINISTERS have been BANNED from using words like Islamist and fundamentalist – in case they offend Muslims.


An eight-page Whitehall guide lists words they should not use when talking about terrorism in public and gives politically correct alternatives.

They are told not to refer to Muslim extremism as it links Islam to violence. Instead, they are urged to talk about terrorism or violent extremism.

Fundamentalist and Jihadi are also banned because they make an “explicit link” between Muslims and terror.

Ministers should say criminals, murderers or thugs instead. Radicalisation must be called brainwashing and talking about moderate or radical Muslims is to be avoided as it “splits the community”.

Islamophobia is also out as it is received as “a slur that singles out Muslims”.