Front Nationale Leader Marine Le Pen to go on trial for remarks
18 replies, posted
[quote]PARIS: French far-right party leader Marine Le Pen will go on trial for comparing Muslim street prayers to wartime Nazi occupation, party officials and the prosecutor's office said on Tuesday.
Le Pen, whom polls see likely to win a regional election in northern France in December, has widened the National Front's appeal since she took its helm in 2011 by expelling extremists and cracking down on anti-Semitism.[/quote]
[url]http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/france-s-le-pen-to-go-on/2144432.html[/url]
Ok, the remark is incredibly retarded. But to go to trial over it?
[QUOTE=DuCT;48740123]Ok, the remark is incredibly retarded. But to go to trial over it?[/QUOTE]
It seems a little strange even to me, and Germany probably has stricter laws in this regard than France does.
I'd understand it if there was more to the quote but it doesn't appear like she was directly inciting violence or anything along those lines.
[editline]22nd September 2015[/editline]
The only reason I could think of is France's strict separation between religion and government, which doesn't exist like that here.
France has a different interpretation of what Freedom of Speech is. It is a lot more flexible than what exists in the USA.
I'm personally happy she is on trial.
Her dad got in trouble before for making revisionist remarks and claiming the holocaust was a detail/was overblown by the allied forces.
They're all fascist fuckheads and while the daughter is a lot better at hiding it than the father, they're all on the same boat. Reason she's going on trial is because she's the leader of a party known to harbor very dangerous and openly fascist/hateful individuals, so her openly spreading this kind of shit is bad because it galvanizes the worst parts of her party to follow suit and spread the same shit. The party's already caused deaths when one of their annual marches went wrong and party members tossed a black man over a guardrail, drowning him in the Seine river.
[QUOTE=person11;48740230]France has a different interpretation of what Freedom of Speech is. It is a lot more flexible than what exists in the USA.
I'm personally happy she is on trial.[/QUOTE]
By "more flexible" you really mean more restrictive.
Freedom of speech was never meant to be interpreted in a way that was detrimental to the other human rights.
[QUOTE=sgman91;48740395]By "more flexible" you really mean more restrictive.[/QUOTE]
Yes exactly. The United States has a restricted interpretation, in which nearly anything goes, while there is some judicial flexibility in France, allowing for prosecutions for harmful statements.
Imagine if Trump were running for President in France...
[QUOTE=Falchion;48740433]Freedom of speech was never meant to be interpreted in a way that was detrimental to the other human rights.[/QUOTE]
The human right not to feel offended?
That's disgusting, she should have free reign to say whatever crock of shit she wants unless she is literally inciting violence.
[QUOTE=PatrickT;48740527]The human right not to feel offended?[/QUOTE]
Exactly :v:
[quote]No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, [B]nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation[/B]. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. [/quote]
Not to mention the fact that comparing people to hostile invaders may incite more serious offences against them.
[QUOTE=person11;48740230]France has a different interpretation of what Freedom of Speech is. It is a lot more flexible than what exists in the USA.
I'm personally happy she is on trial.[/QUOTE]
Wanting people that disagree with you imprisoned is absolutely disgusting.
[editline]23rd September 2015[/editline]
Just curious but should people be imprisoned for calling men or white people oppressors?
that is not a harmful statement so no?
it's easy to not say anything horrifying, people who do it in france could have easily avoided it while campaigning for their ideologies
its not like the national front is or was ever illegal in france
[editline]23rd September 2015[/editline]
i know that argument depends too much on moral objectivity, but something close to that has been achieved in France in the form of a consensus that certain statements are "harmful" while other offensive statements are not
like the last time this was controversial was when a foreigner not aware of french law got fined 5000 euros... but i have no sympathy for a guy who said something along the lines of "it sucks that they didnt finish killing all the jews"
[QUOTE=Mr. N;48740579]That's disgusting, she should have free reign to say whatever crock of shit she wants unless she is literally inciting violence.[/QUOTE]
Galvanizing and spreading hatred against minorities is inciting violence. France is not a dictatorship: she will stand trial and a competent and fair judge will rule on whether what she said could've possibly caused violence or not, like in any first world liberal democracy. People act like simply being under trial is a guarantee that she's already considered guilty.
[QUOTE='[IT] Zodiac;48745201']Galvanizing and spreading hatred against minorities is inciting violence. France is not a dictatorship: she will stand trial and a competent and fair judge will rule on whether what she said could've possibly caused violence or not, like in any first world liberal democracy. People act like simply being under trial is a guarantee that she's already considered guilty.[/QUOTE]
There's a reason why Nazism was free to spread, it was not allowed to be criticized, why should islam or anything else be any different? Islam is very dangerous to western society, Islam advocates violence towards minorities of different religions, ethnicity, sexual orientation and gender. Tolerance to an in-tolerant regime will only mean the intolerant will win.
It says so in the Qur'an and such policies are upheld by many islamic countries with the death penalty, violent punishment or segregation\denial of rights. It baffles me why anyone who supports freedom of expression be it different religion, sexual orientation, transgender etc can support a religion that not only denies such things but actively oppresses and attacks them and wants to replace democracy with Sharia law (gods law).
[QUOTE=person11;48745018]that is not a harmful statement so no?
it's easy to not say anything horrifying, people who do it in france could have easily avoided it while campaigning for their ideologies
its not like the national front is or was ever illegal in france
[editline]23rd September 2015[/editline]
i know that argument depends too much on moral objectivity, but something close to that has been achieved in France in the form of a consensus that certain statements are "harmful" while other offensive statements are not
like the last time this was controversial was when a foreigner not aware of french law got fined 5000 euros... but i have no sympathy for a guy who said something along the lines of "it sucks that they didnt finish killing all the jews"[/QUOTE]
Having certain ideas deemed harmful and banned is not freedom of speech. You're strawmanning but saying that should just mean getting mocked, called racist and a loss of face.
The French argument is that banning harmful phrases (usually racist or xenophobic or holocaust denying phrases that indirectly or directly cause violence) gives more freedom of expression to groups in society without a voice. An additional argument is that you also protect those groups' other rights, like the right to live in peace from discrimination.
[QUOTE=person11;48740457]Yes exactly. The United States has a restricted interpretation, in which nearly anything goes, while there is some judicial flexibility in France, allowing for prosecutions for harmful statements.
Imagine if Trump were running for President in France...[/QUOTE]
He can't, he's American.
I know, I just wanted to illustrate how different both interpretations of Free Speech are by saying that someone like Trump running for President would end up on trial for even more counts than either Le Pen.
[editline]23rd September 2015[/editline]
In that sense, I would like to think of these laws as a kind of "anti-Trump" mechanism. Whether the mechanism works depends on how this trial affects Marine. That she will be convicted is almost certain but that just might increase her support among racists in France.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.