Victory for Lars Hedegaard, not so much for Danish free speech

UPDATE: IFPS-Canada, May 03/11: SHAME ON DENMARK! Lars Hedegaard found guilty of hate speech

Lars HedegaardThe President of the International Free Press Society Lars Hedegaard was acquitted of a hate speech charge in a Danish court earlier today that was brought against him for the ‘crime’ of offending Muslims (references below).

In political prosecutions (and we have some experience in this area) such as that against Lars Hedegaard the goal is not really to punish the ‘offender’ – it is to gain a conviction (at all costs) in order to justify the persecution and to intimidate the persecuted into silence along with those who might choose to emulate him/her.

While the acquittal of Lars Hedegaard is certainly very good news, it is important to note that the only reason he was acquitted is because the judge found, as stated by Hedegaard afterwards, “that my supposedly offensive comments on the violations against little Muslim girls were not intended for public dissemination” (my emphasis). In other words, he was acquitted on a technicality and not because a Danish court refused to uphold an un-democratic thought-crime law written by neo-Nazis cloaked in ‘anti-racist’ clothes.

This ruling means – at best – that Danes are probably going to be allowed to express opinions that others might find offensive so long as they do so in private. As Hedegaard points out, however, the prosecutor knew of the circumstances (ie. that the comments were not intended for public consumption) for a year, but pursued the charge nevertheless.  Clearly, Danish neo-fascists are determined to stamp out free speech even in the privacy of Danish homes now that they have succeeded in repressing public dissent and discussion, so it is highly unlikely they will give up their campaign of truth suppression. After all, if it is possible to write a law against public insults, those made privately can also be made illegal with the stroke of a pen and then gleefully enforced by collaborators and  cowards and those who are simply ‘following orders.’    

Perhaps in today’s Denmark, the confirmation by a court that one is ‘permitted’ to express unpopular opinions behind closed doors may be cause for celebration. If so  then I suppose one could call this a victory of sorts, but to do so merely highlights the dark depths to which Denmark has sunk at the hands of the neo-fascists.

From my perspective here in Canada, however, where a veritable army of pseudo-leftist neo-fascists and dhimmi-police have been spectacularly unsuccessful in silencing our exposure and opposition to aboriginal extremism and the state’s appeasement of it via heavy-handed tactics that included a hate crime investigation against Gary McHale (as testified to by former OPP Commissioner Julian Fantino) and a criminal prosecution against him that ended after two senior officers were charged with Obstructing Justice, the only real winner in Denmark today was Lars Hedegaard. For this I am very happy indeed as he is a good man who has done his best to give voices to those who have been persecuted.

My joy, however, at the prosecution’s failure to get a conviction they so desperately sought does not temper my alarm at the fact that free speech and democracy in that once-Nazi-occupied country is dead or dying fast, nor does it change my opinion that absolutely nothing will save it but the immediate implementation of an all out civil rights struggle against the government as outlined in this recent statement of support for Hedegaard by Gary McHale and me: 



In my next post I will attempt to answer the question of what are the alternatives, if any, to ‘non-violent direct action’ for European free speech advocates.

Mark Vandermaas, Editor


2 responses to “Victory for Lars Hedegaard, not so much for Danish free speech

  1. I’m not as optimistic about the Hedegaard acquittal Mark. Then again I’ve seen enough lunacy emanating from the ranks of our (civilly regressive) ruling class to jade the Buddha himself. I think they let this big fish go before it ruined their tackle so they will continue on catching lots of little fish. In my jaded opinion Hedegaard got the same treatment afforded Mark Steyn from the Kangaroos of the BC Human Rights Star Chamber.

    Both Denmark and Canada have a civilly abusive hate law on the statures which negates most individual rights and allows a group of witch hunting autocrats cart blanche power to prosecute the exercise of ancient civil rights. As in Denmark, Canada’s law convicts a truthful statement, ignores mens rea, does not require proof of damage, convicts on hearsay, has reverse onus and ignores the process of fundamental justice. As in Canada Sharia witch hunters tried to take down a truthful articulate media personality with the resources to fight back and expose the insidious workings of these Sharia blasphemy trials. Hedegaard, like Steyn, was released on some technicality which gave an avenue of escape to the regressivist kangaroos prosecuting them when they feared public backlash. Just like the Steyn case, this Danish Sharia blasphemy trial saw the prosecuting social engineers scurrying like cockroaches to avoid the light shone on their despicable little racket of shaking down citizens at the behest of special interests who are in a constant state of being offended by the free exercise of civil rights.

    When you see this disease take root in all the established free democracies, you know it’s more than a coincidence. The degeneration of our civil liberty by the triumvirate of minority race baiters, multicult Marxists and their degenerate identity group politics is on disply for all to see. Even the politicians and judiciary realise they are rendering the ancient institutes of western liberal democracy and civil liberty into an Orwellian night mare.

    We see it yet our politicians are too gutless to defend basic civil liberty. That leaves us to rely on our own resources in reclaiming lost justice and liberty taken by the expansion of autocratic dystopian statism. We must be prepared to fight it every time it rears its ugly head. Hedegaard did but his stand would have been for naught if it were not for the civil outrage of a majority of citizens making his persecutors step back. We must commit ourselves to fight the oppression of any and all citizens the demented state attempts to persecute for exercising their civil rights. Stand united against bureaucratic tyranny or watch it destroy us individually.

    VoC: Hi Bill, you thought I was being optimistic somehow? Optimistic about what? The acquittal? (that’s the whole point of my article – that it isn’t cause for celebration on behalf of free speech). Or the effectiveness of Dr. King’s ‘non-violent direct action’ approach? (the ONLY thing, in my opinion, that can save Europe before some there see no other option but armed resistance).

    I agree with everything you said which jives exactly with what I wrote, so I’m confused. Sorry, did I misunderstand your point? 🙂

    Thanks for writing. Mark

    P.S. We’ll see how many are willing to “stand united” with us on the 27th. at our Truth & Reconciliation Rally in Caledonia. Will be posting media releases today/tomorrow; got some stuff to finish first.

  2. Sorry Mark for any unintended redundancy but I think my rant was more focused at VOC readers. My point was not to be to smug in pointing fingers at the Europeans and clucking our tongues at them for throwing away centuries of civil rights in some insane attempt to appear “progressive” to ideologies which are the opposite.

    We have had these “hate” witch hunts and blasphemy show trials here – they still happen daily. Let’s do something about it before we end up like Europe – Orwell’s nightmare.

    VoC: Actually, your point is a good one; the only real difference between us, in theory, is that Europe has criminalized free speech as opposed to Canada using a pseudo-judicial HR tribunals. The Levant/Steyn prosecutions are prime examples. I surely didn’t mean to say that we don’t have our own problems.

    The prosecution of Gary McHale criminally is a prime example of using criminal courts to silence free speech here. The OPP’s goal wasn’t to arrest a lawbreaker, but to silence an effective opponent.

    One of the prime reasons for writing the Dr. King/Denmark free speech stmt which IFPS published was to help people understand that, as we said in it, what is being done legally in Denmark is being done illegally here. The precedent set by European countries in suppressing free speech truly poses a dangerous one to Canadians.

    We are on the same page, Wild Bill. Thanks for clarifying. Mark