Denmark Brings First Blasphemy Case In 46 Years

190px-WLM_-_roel1943_-_Koran150px-national_coat_of_arms_of_denmark-svgFor many years, I have been writing about the threat of an international blasphemy standard and the continuing rollback on free speech in the West. For recent columns, click here and here and here. Now, Denmark has opened up its first blasphemy prosecution in 46 years. It is chilling evidence that the West is yielding to the pressure to curtail free speech in a crackdown on those who criticize or mock religion.  In this case, a 42-year-old man protested what he viewed as the growing influence of Islam by setting a Quran on fire.  The result is now a criminal charge for blasphemy as Denmark joins this worrisome trend.


Much of my prior writing has focused on the effort of the Obama Administration to reach an accommodation with allies like Egypt and Pakistan to develop a standard for criminalizing anti-religious speech.  We have been following the rise of anti-blasphemy laws around the world, including the increase in prosecutions in the West and the support of the Obama Administration for the prosecution of some anti-religious speech under the controversial Brandenburg standard.

These cases reflect the true purpose of blasphemy laws: to silence minority sects and religious critics in the name of a “true faith.” Fortunately the effort of Hillary Clinton and others in the Obama Administration to reach a compromise on blasphemy failed, though there continue to be efforts to create an international standard. These efforts were ultimately unsuccessful but countries like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, and Iran continue to push the West to abandon its free speech protections.


In this case, the man posted a clip  entitled “Consider your neighbour: it stinks when it burns” to a group called “YES TO FREEDOM – NO TO ISLAM” in December 2015.  The prosecution office made clear that it is willing to criminally charge anyone who mocks religion.  Spokesperson Jan Reckendorff said: “It is the prosecution’s view that circumstances involving the burning of holy books such as the Bible and the Quran can in some cases be a violation of the blasphemy clause, which covers public scorn or mockery of religion.”

 The man could face anything from a fine to four years in prison under clause 140 of Denmark’s penal code banning any public acts insulting or degrading religious doctrines or worship.  Since critics of religion will often be accused of “insulting” religion, that constitutes a lingering threat to the exercise of free speech on one of the most divisive issues in our society.
Most people had hoped that Denmark was done enforcing speech codes after 1971 when it prosecuted two Denmark Radio producers for airing a song mocking Christianity.  Prosecutors have however rediscovered the power to silence people who want to voice controversial viewpoints on religion.



160 thoughts on “Denmark Brings First Blasphemy Case In 46 Years”

  1. “when you have no factual grounds for claiming any of these people harmfulwa.”

    I can prove twelve ways from Sunday you are full of s**t.

    Go ahead.

    Ask me how.

      1. What hate? It’s all in good fun. I would have looked forward to either the octagon cage math or the debate. Which evs.

        I say this as a guy who had his @$$ handed to him by an 11 year old Thai kid in a bar in Pattaya. After he beat up a 260 pound Seabee. As he would have done to you.

        The tyke was extremely fit, I’ll give him that.

      2. Hate is en expensive emotion. In all seriousness, I can not afford it. If you want to find me despicable in some other way, feel free.

  2. Olly: The first three paragraphs are from your post:

    “Our foreign policy like our domestic policy doesn’t align with our founding principles. We have no more right to try to infect other nations with our culture than other nations have a right to infect ours. Our form of government and our constitution are designed specifically to work within a culture that accepts the principles of the DoI. It’s our nations history preceding the DoI that make that document so profound and our constitution so valuable.

    “This is what makes a nation-building foreign policy such an utter failure. These other countries and cultures do not share our experiences and we don’t share theirs. The cultures within the ME have their own history to manage. We cannot be so arrogant as to think cultures that have not experienced the enlightenment era transformations will be or should be receptive to western civilization forms of government. So these countries have oil. That does not mean that western cultures that need THEIR “property” have a right to try and install “friendly” governments so that we can get those resources. And yes, if we violate their “rights”, regardless of how backwards we believe they are, we should expect retaliation.

    “So what do we do now? The ME had developed their own means to manage their own cultures. We displaced that means (knocked the hornets down) and nave loosed them beyond their borders. So how do we fix this? One thing you absolutely DO NOT do is invite a pre-enlightenment era culture into post-enlightenment era cultures. If it makes no sense for us to project our 21st century cultures there then it should not make sense to invite their 12th century culture here. We should be open to accepting those people that can be proven to share our fundamental principles and will assimilate into our culture.”

    I like what you’ve written in the first two paragraphs, but this is the hypothetical question whether our Constitution is designed specifically – partially, more like – to work within a culture that accepts the principles of the Declaration of Independence. We fought it out in the early 1860s as to whether independence is a remedy for what any of us considers tyranny, and I think that issue created by the Declaration of Independence has been foreclosed. Protest is one thing; secession is another.

    So what do we do now (after what appears to be our agreement that we’ve stretched the American Empire to critical mass)? It’s a great question, and I’m comforted by the fact that you are one of the few Republicans or Democrats with the cajones to discuss it.

    “One thing you absolutely DO NOT do is invite a pre-enlightenment era culture into post-enlightenment era cultures. If it makes no sense for us to project our 21st century cultures there then it should not make sense to invite their 12th century culture here.” I don’t agree with this.

    First and foremost, we’re a nation of immigrants, but you presume you know what’s in the minds of those immigrants and prefer to preempt what you presume. Did we preempt Sicilian immigration when the mob showed us how profitable murder and a black market economy were? Did we preempt German immigration when Hitler invaded western Europe?

    “In May 1939, only a few months before war began in Europe, a passenger ship called the St. Louis left Germany carrying nearly a thousand refugees, most of them Jews. Many of these people had already qualified for, but had not yet received, American visas. They arranged for temporary Cuban tourist visas that would let them wait outside of Germany for U.S. visas. When the St. Louis reached Havana, however, the Cuban government had changed its visa regulations. It refused to allow most of the refugees to land.

    “Finally, the St. Louis returned to Europe and several nations granted asylum to the refugees. But when Hitler’s troops marched through Europe, the Nazis eventually caught most of the St. Louis’ ill-fated passengers and sent them to concentration camps. . . .

    “At the beginning of World War II, the U.S. government did not believe reports that Hitler was carrying out a plan to murder millions of European Jews. But by November 1942, the evidence was overwhelming. Once again, American Jewish leaders appealed to Roosevelt: If the president would ask Congress to change the immigration laws, more refugees could escape the Holocaust. Again, FDR refused. Instead, he joined the British in condemning the Nazi genocide (mass killing) of Jews.

    “Wartime brought on a sharp decline in immigration when the government imposed even stricter visa regulations. Officials feared that enemy spies and saboteurs might enter the country in the guise of refugees. But as the American public became aware of the enormity of the Nazi atrocities, people began to demand that the United States do something to rescue the remaining Jewish people of Europe. In November 1943, the Emergency Committee to Save the Jewish People of Europe introduced a rescue resolution in Congress.

    “Once again, the State Department objected. This angered Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau Jr., a Jew, who was appalled by the Nazi mass killings. Since 1933, the State Department had opposed nearly every attempt to help Jewish refugees. On January 16, 1944, Morgenthau met with FDR and summarized a report prepared by his department. The report documented the long history of State Department obstructionism in refugee matters. (This report was originally titled, “Report to the Secretary on the Acquiescence of This Government in the Murder of the Jews.”)

    “In response, Roosevelt signed an executive order instructing Congress to implement most of the provisions of the rescue resolution. The order created a War Refugee Board “to take all measures within its policy to rescue victims of enemy oppression in imminent danger of death.”

    In WWII, we were not the aggressors in Europe. There were other bad guys. On the other hand, we are and have been since at least the end of WWII the primary aggressors in the Middle East and now we’ve created a second class of aggressor, the insurrectionists we support (al-Nusra, etc.) and those we don’t (ISIL) through our efforts to destabilize those countries.

    Your position is more like the early 19th century. The Indian Removal Act of 1830, relocated the Five Tribes from Florida, Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi on the Trail of Tears. While still unconscionable, the proffered intent there at least was to avoid the slaughter of American Indians by state militias by marching them to reservations in the West after they were invaded.

    What the 21st Century means to me culturally is that we’ve learned from our mistakes in moving toward a civilized society. I do not understand how you can pick and choose who is living in the 13th century when you believe in the mistake of shutting down and delaying immigration status and allowing innocent people to be killed in Somalia, Sudan, Libya, Yemen, Iraq, Iran, and Syria like FDR did to innocent Jews in WWII and knowing we are a primary cause of their suffering. That’s not learning from our mistakes. You cannot claim anything to be different in the 21st century by banning immigration when we’re the aggressor and when you have no factual grounds for claiming any of these people harmful.

    1. The blasphemy law is not the problem. The disposition of the Danish elite toward their own people is the problem. It’s a problem in most occidental countries. The one exception is Israel, which is, not surprisingly, despise by the Eurotrash in Brussels. Cretins like this fellow

    1. My great-grandmother and my grandfather (who was eight at the time) like his two much older brothers before him, arrived at Ellis Island in 1907 from Mogeltonder, Denmark. They were all Seventh Day Adventists who eventually ended up in Oakland and Healdsburg, California.

      1. How much would you say they owed to the descendants of former slaves in the form of reparations, given their white privilege?

        1. I have nothing on which to base an answer to your question, other than my own experience with my Danish maternal grandfather, because I never met any of his siblings or his parents.

          My maternal grandfather, although he was very good to me, could be described in no other way except as an unrepentant racist. He lived for nearly all of his life in Oakland, through two world wars and the Korean conflict. Oakland was much less diverse prior to the wars when African Americans came to work in the shipyards. I’d frequently him say with a disgusted look on his face when he heard something relevant on the newscast, “Those niggers.” I cannot remember my grandfather ever acknowledging positively, let alone speaking to, an African American.

          I do remember one time, however, when he was driving my mother, my grandmother, and I (I was about 14 at the time) on a Sunday across the bridge over the Carquinez Strait into Vallejo and Solano County on Interstate 80. The bridge required a toll only when traveling north, the amount of which my grandfather had completely neglected to bring. As we scrabbled to find enough change, he pulled up to the toll booth, and we all noticed a smiling, middle-aged, African-American woman in her uniform ready to accept the toll. My mother and I looked at each other in anticipation of the verbal exchange knowing my grandfather.

          When my humbled grandfather said he didn’t have correct amount for the toll, the toll-taker responded by saying “That’s okay. You go right on ahead, and have a nice day.” My grandfather graciously replied, “Thank you.” There was silence in the car for about 20 seconds as we drove off, and then my grandfather turned to us and said, “They’re not all bad.”

          1. Steve Groen – it is interesting how we are raised and how that affects us. My family taught us to be accepting of everybody. Every summer, from the time I was 8 until I was 16, I rode the train across North Dakota. My parents would tip the black porters to an eye on me and keep my out of trouble. My first bad clash with blacks came during college and a summer program I was working on. One black kid and I were allowed to work without supervision while the rest of the herd was closely watched. This was the only time I have been attacked by a black, who was with the herd.

            1. Paul: True. IT is interesting how our early experiences affect us. I’ve never had those problems you mention, although I never have taken many chances in new neighborhoods which appear to be high crime areas. In San Diego, Logan Heights and National City are not areas I venture into at night if I can help it. The Latino gangs – and they’re serious organizations, as you probably know – are the most problematic here.

              One time back in my early 20s, I avoided what could have been an unpleasant experience when I took a bus from Milwaukee to a Who concert on the south side of Chicago. I arrived in the early afternoon for a 6:00PM show, so I decided to wander the neighborhood on foot for a while. An elderly black fellow sitting in a rocking chair on his front porch gave me some advice as I was walking past his home on a busy four-lane thoroughfare: He pointed with his index finger and said, “Don’t go past those railroad tracks, young fella” (there was a railroad overpass across the street I was walking on perhaps a quarter of a mile farther down). That’s all he said. I nodded and kept going. I didn’t understand at first, but within the next few hundred yards or so, I took his advice and turned around.

  3. I have previously explained my view that blasphemy laws violate freedom of speech and are therefore intolerable in any civilized society. This prosecution is insane.

    1. The European Union and its member states are no longer a civilized society. That ultimately is why the Brits voted to leave it. It is universally accepted by all European courts that when it comes to blasphemy or any other form of “hate speech” law that the truth is no defense. This is true all the way up to the Court of Justice of the European Union, the final court of appeal for anyone convicted of making what Muslims consider intolerably but unarguably true statements about Islam. The CJEU has affirmed those convictions. And when the truth is no defense, there is no defense. And when there is no defense against what the powers that be consider an expression of crimethink, you have abandoned civilization for an arbitrary criminal tyranny.

            1. Anon, citing the New York Times hardly adds any credibility to your claim that accused murderer Adam Purinton was committing a hate crime. The NYT eschews facts and is a passionate fake news advocate. Note, for example, that the NYT offers no useful or enlightening information about Purinton anywhere in their article. The NYT actually was a better newspaper and even demonstrated occasional genuine journalism when they had Jayson Blair writing stories for them. But now, they are merely presstitutes.

              At least Laila Kearney of Thomson Reuters has attemtped to gather and present some facts about Purinton:


              But, as you will note in her article, which provides some insights into Purinton’s background, there is scant evidence that his crime constituted a hate crime.

              Of course the fake news lame stream media presstitutes immediately put a hate crime spin on the story without any facts if the perpetrator happens to be a caucasian male. If the perpetrator is of any other race, then, of course, the presstitutes never see any hatred whatsoever even when confronted with overwhelming evidence that the crime was motivated by hatred. Thus, if the perpetrator is black or a Muslim, then the presstitutes will always try to pass the crime off as caused by mental illness or some other rationale. You could call these fake news manufacturers hypocrites, but that goes without saying. They are just being their natural selves: presstitutes.

    1. The blindness is all yours.

      “Thousands mourn ‘blind sheikh’ convicted in 1993 World Trade Center bombing

      Thousands of mourners gathered in a small Egyptian town on Wednesday for the funeral of the Muslim cleric known as “the blind sheikh” who was convicted of conspiracy in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing in New York.

      Omar Abdel-Rahman, who was also convicted of planning a broader “war of urban terrorism” in the United States, died on Saturday in a North Carolina prison aged 78.

      Movements across the Islamist spectrum from the Muslim Brotherhood to al Qaeda issued statements mourning him, and several leaders from Egypt’s Islamic Group, which views the sheikh as a spiritual leader and renounced violence in 1997, attended.

      I never thought I’d agree with Obama’s national security adviser on anything, but he’s correct that reporters literally know nothing, and are easily fooled. I’ll bet they actually believe that Egypt’s Islamic Group renounced violence in 1997. Even though anyone who isn’t blind, like Benson here, can easily document that they continue to engage in violence. In fact, they announce when they have planned violence, such as threatening to burn the US embassy, and make hostages of anyone who survives, in order to force the release of their spiritual leader Abdel Rahman.

      “”If he were a bad man, people from all over the country wouldn’t have came to attend his funeral,” said Mostafa al-Wakeel, a 40-year-old lawyer who traveled around 175 kilometers (110 miles) from Cairo. ”

      Mr. al-Wakeel is correct. Engaging in terrorism and killing infidels doesn’t make anyone a bad man. He was simply following the example of his prophet as Allah commands. Engaging in terrorism against the infidel makes him a good man according to the tenets of Islam. That’s why thousands of mourners came to his funeral, and millions more Muslims mourn his passage. This convicted terrorists understanding of Islam is very mainstream.

      Surah 3:151

      “We will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve for what they have associated with Allah of which He had not sent down [any] authority. And their refuge will be the Fire, and wretched is the residence of the wrongdoers.”

      “We.” Who is this “we” Allah is talking about joining with to terrorize the disbelievers, Benson?

      And while you’re at it, why don’t you take up Sandra’s challenge and cite all the verses in Quran and all those hadith that commands Muslims to respect other religions, and to live with the adherents of those other religions in peace and tolerance.

      Oh, I know why. Because Allah hates them as disbelievers and commands Muslims to likewise hate them and terrorize and punish them as the tool of his wrath in this world. Now it’s coming back to me. Muslims are the rest of the “we” Allah is talking about in this, one of many verses about terrorism.

      Surah 9:14

      “Fight them; Allah will punish them by your hands and will disgrace them and give you victory over them and satisfy the breasts of a believing people”

      Surah 9:74

      “They swear by Allah that they did not say [anything against the Prophet] while they had said the word of disbelief and disbelieved after their [pretense of] Islam and planned that which they were not to attain. And they were not resentful except [for the fact] that Allah and His Messenger had enriched them of His bounty. So if they repent, it is better for them; but if they turn away, Allah will punish them with a painful punishment in this world and the Hereafter. And there will not be for them on earth any protector or helper.”

      I enjoy it when fools like you accuse me of blind prejudice. It gives me the opportunity to demonstrate I’m the only one involved who both knows what he’s talking about and isn’t going to lie (like knowledgeable Muslims will) to cover up the fact that if you excised all the hateful venom and commands to commit violence against the adherents of other religions, the disbelievers, there’d be almost nothing left of the Quran.

      Sahih al-Bukhari – Book of Fighting for the Cause of Allah (Jihaad) – (122) Chapter: “I have been made victorious…”

      And how was the prophet made victorious, ignorant or lying friend Benson?

      ” Narrated Abu Huraira:

      Allah’s Messenger said, “I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand.” Abu Huraira added: Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) has left the world and now you, people, are bringing out those treasures (i.e. the Prophet did not benefit by them).”

      That’s right, my ignorant or lying friend Benson. Allah’s prophet was made victorious with terror. And that is what made the Blind Sheikh a good man according to the tenets of Islam. He was following the example of his prophet, as Allah commands all Muslims to do.

      Surah 33:21

      “There has certainly been for you in the Messenger of Allah an excellent pattern for anyone whose hope is in Allah and the Last Day and [who] remembers Allah often.”

    2. Indeed, David Benson, we must cease our prejudice of Islamic terrorism. We Americans are collectively responsible for these acts, not Muslims. Islamic State is only forced into taking deadly action because of the sins of Americans. We must find ways to make Islamic State happy and to stop being so fearful of them, as Steve Groen, so aptly put it. Only through complete acceptance of any and all Islamic acts and through total condemnation of Israel can we achieve salvation, as Steve Groen directs us to do. We must ensure that we follow what Steve Groen and Islamic State wants. They have only our best interests at heart.

      1. Sarcasm, much as I enjoy it and fools like Benson and anon deserve to be treated with it, in all seriousness we have been lied to for a very long time. We continue to be lied to.

        “by Raymond Ibrahim September 10, 2012

        According to El Fagr, they are calling for the immediate release of the Islamic jihadis who are imprisonment and in detention centers in the U.S. including Guantanamo Bay: “The group, which consists of many members from al-Qaeda, called [especially] for the quick release of the jihadi [mujahid] sheikh, Omar Abdul Rahman [the “Blind Sheikh”], whom they described as a scholar and jihadi who sacrificed his life for the Egyptian Umma, who was ignored by the Mubarak regime, and [President] Morsi is refusing to intervene on his behalf and release him, despite promising that he would. The Islamic Group has threatened to burn the U.S. Embassy in Cairo with those in it, and taking hostage those who remain [alive], unless the Blind Sheikh is immediately released.””

        The unfathomably stupid American left will believe with no evidence that Egypt’s Islamic Group renounced violence in1997, yet here they are calling for violence in 2012. The lying Obama administration would have you you believe it was about a video, not Abdel-Rahman.

        As the song goes, “What a fool believes.”

        Obama didn’t just lie to us about Benghazi, he lied about Cairo. And the fools continue to believe it. And reincarnate tired old nicknames like “Col. Flagg” in their impotent attempt to block the truth.

        1. Good article, Steve57, and nice Doobie Bros. video, but “What A Fool Believes” doesn’t quite capture the essence of what you’re talking about as well as this song:

  4. Ralph Adamo, you are correct sir.

    “It is people like you and me who are to blame for the Islamic murders, rapes, and other criminal acts that they are forced to commit by the treacherous and sinister Americans and Israelis.”

    You know what makes my guilt even worse? I used my Satanic powers to cast all the reasons why the Muslims would be correct to hate Israelis and Americans back into the canonical texts centuries before there was an America or Israel.

    No wonder the crime the sorcery will get you killed in Saudi Arabia.

    1. In the news today, an Islamic State car bomb killed more than 50 people on Friday in a Syrian village held by rebels, a war monitor said, a day after the jihadist group was driven from its last stronghold in the area. Again, we Americans are collectively responsible for these acts. Islamic State was only forced into taking deadly action because of the sins of Americans. We must find ways to make Islamic State happy and to stop being so fearful of them, as Steve Groen, so aptly put it. Only through complete acceptance of any and all Islamic acts and through total condemnation of Israel can we achieve salvation, as Steve Groen directs us to do. We must ensure that we follow what Steve Groen and Islamic State wants. They have only our best interests at heart.

  5. I defy anyone who can show me authoritative verses or Hadith or Islamic rulings that say Islam respects all other religions and considers them equal, that those who disagree with Islam will not be punished, and that their belief is valid.
    Show me!
    (Hint: Islam says the exact opposite.)

    1. Sandra, don’t expect anyone to take up your challenge. You’re dealing with lightweight narcissists like anon. He likes to rely on leftist BSers like Juan Cole as sources who spoon feed him what he should think either personally or have some other leftist and BSer like Lena Salaymeh do it. Seriously, this guy thinks Juan Cole is somehow an authoritative source. He’ll never crack open an actual Shariah manual like Umdat al-Salik and do the hard work of thinking for himself.

      I doubt he and his ilk are capable of it. They’re intellectually lazy and prefer to rely on sources like Juan Cole to confirm his biases and tell him what opinions he should have instead.

      So it matters little to many of the people commenting here what Islam actually teaches. They’d rather indulge in a hatefest against Donald Trump and his informed supporters (much more informed than anon will ever be) because it’s more emotionally satisfying to those who’d rather rely on their lizard brains and emote than think.

    2. Oh, by the way, you’re a racist and bigot. Because reading the original, authoritative Islamic sources and thinking for yourself is “Islamophobic.”

      That’s why leftist never do either.

      But welcome to the club.

  6. It is dangerous to have any area of human existence off limit for discussion and possible “mocking”! Half the time various religious “leaders” make mock of their religion by their own actions.

    Zeus, you will now take the stand. Do you feel mocked by that Zoroastrian statue over there??? Yes, answered Zeus, but I don’t need you piddling humans to deal with it. One of my thunderbolts will work just fine!

  7. Oh, but don’t the hard left love Denmark and Sweden as utopias? Sweden, too, suffers under severe speech restrictions. A police officer had charges brought against him when he made a FB post criticizing the increase in crime due to refugees.

    Oh, how the extreme Left would love to control what we were allowed to say, and stifle our right to criticize government, or really any other topic.

    Suddenly, their love affair with such countries makes more sense.

    1. Karen, I don’t believe it’ s the “hard Left” – it’s the corporations IMO. They are immune to social unrest and pitting people against each other always works for their advantage.

      1. So far it’s been Progressives working for blasphemy laws (Obama and HRC) as well as infringing upon the free speech of conservatives in universities across America. 50 years ago it was conservatives bookburning. Corporations like the cheap labor of illegal aliens and replacing citizens with cheaper h1 visas. As far as free speech they do tend to fold to the various boycotts.

        1. 50 years ago it was conservatives bookburning.

          Tell me, what did Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan, Clare Boothe Luce, Phyllis Schlafly, Wm. F. Buckley, Emmet Tyrell, Russell Kirk, Frank Meyer, Will Herberg, William Rusher, James Jackson Kilpatrick, Paul Harvey, &c. ever have to do with bookburning? The inventory of people convicted of trafficking in pornography was pulped, to be sure, but civic life isn’t improved by I Am Curious, Yellow?.

          1. The answer to speech is more speech. Or to put it another way, I don’t want anon to shut up. I like it when he, she, or it (I don’t know what) talks. Sing it, sister!

        2. The idea that neo-liberals like Obama and HRC belong to the “hard left” is hilarious.

          1. Obama is a fine example of someone who got his political education reading The Nation ca. 1981. He has no opinion which would be out of place emerging from the mouth of the deputy dean of students at a high-priced private college.

            1. Which is why I referred to his administration as the freshman dorm. Circa 1981. You nailed it. Fortunately for the rest of us the decorating committee for the prom is now out of office. The only people who are sad are the Mullahs, who have lost their party favor.

          2. By ‘hard left’ you mean ANSWER cretins and the Workers World Party. Those people are witless hobbyists who have no analogue in electoral politics.

      1. Seems I recall during one of the debates HRC saying to Bernie that the US is not Denmark. The Dems demonize Scandinavia as much as the Repuglicans. Same coin different sides. Anyone who thinks the Dems care about anything but keeping donations flowing and the corporations it represents is seriously deluded.

        1. Will insure that you progressive Trumpsters get more and better bans. Progressives for work camps?

          1. Keep on keepin’ the Dim way. It’s working out SO well for the party isn’t it? That grotesque corpse Nancy Pelosi laughing all the way to the bank and back (in between cosmetic surgery of course), loser Shumer, Booker the magical Negro, hedge fund guy Howard Dean, hysterical Warren, Ellison who loves wars, and on it goes. How much more can you lose?

            Don’t blame us when we fail to fall for the same old crap

            1. The anti-Trump movement has grown a life of its own and it is not confined to the Democratic Party.

              1. the anti Trump movement is on the whole NOT populated by indies. It’s all the hard core Dim losers who sat around for the last 8 years and NEVER held Oboma accountable for the extension of wars, Obama”care”, taking away our legal rights, pro TPP, not protecting DAPL, continuing the invasive security state…….

                So don’t imagine we are joining up now that you’ve decided to protest..

                1. You need to get out of your Trump bubble. The events are full of Bernie folks and Stein voters. Met a Stein voter with rainbow colored hair the other day. She has been an anti- war activist for nearly 50 years. Trump has done more to bring people together than I could have ever imagined. The Muslim ban has been a huge catalyst in my community. I can see the anti-trans EO having a similar effect.

                  1. The biggest “effect” creati ng this astro-turf “anti-Trump movement” is George Soros’ money. Without paid protesters it wouldn’t exist.

              1. To most of the country, including people like me who were not Trump supporters before the election, that is very good news. Keep it coming, anon. You and people like you are how we got Trump and this glorious hard right cabinet.

              2. The odds were always very good that President Trump’s cabinet would be somewhere to the right of what we’ve had for a very long time. It’s’ apparently very shocking for you to see one that may actually want to enforce the rule of law and separation of powers. Oh the horror, President Trump moving right of President’s in recent memory. Oh the horror of President Trump following through on campaign promises. Oh the horror of President Trump wanting real national security and real economic growth.

                Your welcome.

        2. I’ll mince no words on this…

          For those who believe in the time tested, “original” platform the Democratic Party they would be best served to completely overthrow the leadership of that party. If such efforts prove unsuccessful the next option–and a very difficult one to accomplish–is to form a unified alternative party and fully abandon the Democratic Party, relegating it to the likes of the Whig Party.

                1. Steve,
                  – With hard work and a high profile candidate, the Green Party ‘s share of the vote may skyrocket to 2% in time.

                  I think the biggest obstacle for the Green Party is that few people buy what they’re selling.

    2. The hard right wing’s hair has been on fire about Scandinavia’s socialized medicine for forever.

  8. Well, if we were to apply such laws equally here, then each and every time someone criticized Christianity, any religion, Islam, Islamic terrorists, Republicans, Liberals, Independents, Trump, Hillary Clinton, etc etc they would be in jail. Which means that I suppose we would have the ultimate socialism and we’d all be in jail working in gangs for $.10 an hour. Oh, that’s kind of like Cuba, isn’t it? Where no one can sell their home and they can only trade it and no new homes can be built or new cars and everyone gets $20 a month to starve on and free low quality health care? And they’re trapped on that island and can only get out by using a raft across shark infested waters? I guess they’re already in prison.

Comments are closed.