Former screen siren Bardot convicted in race case

[Thoreau]

Former screen siren Bardot convicted in race case

Tue Jun 3, 10:32 AM ET




Brigitte Bardot was convicted Tuesday of provoking discrimination and racial hatred for writing that Muslims are destroying France.

A Paris court also handed down a $23,325 fine against the former screen siren and animal rights campaigner. The court also ordered Bardot to pay $1,555 in damages to MRAP.

Bardot's lawyer, Francois-Xavier Kelidjian, said he would talk to her about the possibility of an appeal.

A leading French anti-racism group known as MRAP filed a lawsuit last year over a letter she sent to then-Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy. The remarks were published in her foundation's quarterly journal.

In the December 2006 letter to Sarkozy, now the president, Bardot said France is "tired of being led by the nose by this population that is destroying us, destroying our country by imposing its acts."

Bardot, 73, was referring to the Muslim feast of Aid el-Kebir, celebrated by slaughtering sheep.

French anti-racism laws prevent inciting hatred and discrimination on racial or religious or racial grounds. Bardot had been convicted four times previously for inciting racial hatred.

"She is tired of this type of proceedings," he said. "She has the impression that people want to silence her. She will not be silenced in her defense of animal rights."


I've always been taught that Islam was a religion and doesn't equate to race - therefore religion should not be categorised in the same category as race.

Evidently I am far too ignorant to the politically correct laws that are in place to preserve the rights of the minority peoples.

Mrs Bardot should have been charged with discrimination against religion and not race, she will tarred with the racist brush even if the points she made had little to do with race, but religion. It is miraculous that in this day and age when tolerance is supposedly at its pinnacle; yet those who claim to be tolerant and courageous individuals cannot decipher between race and religion. :rolleyes:

It was evidently an outburst to Muslim's inhumane treatment of animals, only those with authority manipulated the evidence and twisted her words into a "racially motivated" speech inciting racial hatred and violence.

In future if Mrs Bardot wants to avoid her fifth conviction she should word her letters more intellectually, so that her letters are harder to decipher and easier to misunderstand.

[Hafke]

Yeah, the fact the no one seems able to tell the difference between race and religion is quite confusing. Race is an accident of birth which has no bearing on the person. Religion is a cultural tool which is freely chosen. What people believe is of the utmost importance, and so it should be open to scrutiny. Even if one is not convinced by that, what about freedom of speech?

[pauli007001]

Former screen siren Bardot convicted in race case



Tue Jun 3, 10:32 AM ET





I've always been taught that Islam was a religion and doesn't equate to race - therefore religion should not be categorised in the same category as race.

Evidently I am far too ignorant to the politically correct laws that are in place to preserve the rights of the minority peoples.

Mrs Bardot should have been charged with discrimination against religion and not race, she will tarred with the racist brush even if the points she made had little to do with race, but religion. It is miraculous that in this day and age when tolerance is supposedly at its pinnacle; yet those who claim to be tolerant and courageous individuals cannot decipher between race and religion. :rolleyes:

It was evidently an outburst to Muslim's inhumane treatment of animals, only those with authority manipulated the evidence and twisted her words into a "racially motivated" speech inciting racial hatred and violence.

In future if Mrs Bardot wants to avoid her fifth conviction she should word her letters more intellectually, so that her letters are harder to decipher and easier to misunderstand.

Some Union decided that when they say islamic they mean non white(African=12%islamic.Asian47%.Indian72%.Arab 80%.European 13%)!
In other words to voice an anti islamic opinion will be a criminal act of racism,not of religous intolerance.However an islamic act of or words of terror/threats of terror will be considered to be our just deserts for out history of colonialism!
Yeah sounds like ....................well how can i say this without being anti Islamic or racist................The bowel movements of pigs,to me!!!!!
I suppose that the fact that i hate Gefilte fish means that i am anti semetic then?
This is in agreement with you Thoreau can you adam and eve it!

[Albion 69]

Yeah, the fact the no one seems able to tell the difference between race and religion is quite confusing. Race is an accident of birth which has no bearing on the person. Religion is a cultural tool which is freely chosen. What people believe is of the utmost importance, and so it should be open to scrutiny. Even if one is not convinced by that, what about freedom of speech?

Religion freely chosen ?..........if you were accidentally born in Saudi Arabia you would have virtually no choice and be raised a Muslim . If accidentally born in North Korea your religion would be worshipping the state , very few people actually choose their religion most are indoctrinated from an early age the particular brand usually depending on where they are born .

[Thoreau]

Religion freely chosen ?..........if you were accidentally born in Saudi Arabia you would have virtually no choice and be raised a Muslim . If accidentally born in North Korea your religion would be worshipping the state , very few people actually choose their religion most are indoctrinated from an early age the particular brand usually depending on where they are born .

You aren't erroneous there. Hafke also isn't erroneous either in what they have said. I was raised an Othordox Catholic where I had to learn Latin as a young boy and spoke only in Latin to my Priest and fellow Church attendee's. I chose to cease attending the Chruch as I became an agnostic.

In the Western World it is far easier to freely choose a religion than in the Eastern World. It still doesn't explain why Bordat was charged with inciting racial hatred and violence, when Islam is a religion and not a race. :rolleyes:

[Albion 69]

You aren't erroneous there. Hafke also isn't erroneous either in what they have said. I was raised an Othordox Catholic where I had to learn Latin as a young boy and spoke only in Latin to my Priest and fellow Church attendee's. I chose to cease attending the Chruch as I became an agnostic.

In the Western World it is far easier to freely choose a religion than in the Eastern World. It still doesn't explain why Bordat was charged with inciting racial hatred and violence, when Islam is a religion and not a race. :rolleyes:

True , in the Western World our individual upbringing has a far greater baring on what we believe.I am a bit of hypocrite as i think teaching Religion in schools is wrong but believe the Christian heritage we have in this country should be protected and given priority over other cultures religions .

I think Bardot should not have been charged for the reason you give but more importantly because what she said was not provoking discrimination and racial hatred . These laws are so vague they end up stifling free speech which adds to the resentment against minorities which rather undermines the point of these Laws ..... bloody stupid in my view.

[Thoreau]

Political Correctness - ironically is a system that creates more hostility and racial hatred than just having a normal, healthy and organic society, where everyone regardless of age, gender, race, religion and sexual orientation is treated the same and these pigeon holes are considered nonentities.

Unfortunately Politics is organised and excuted by society's elite who have little or no understanding of what it is like to live in a multicultural and diverse society.

I'm a Nationalist who believes in preservation of a nation's cultural customs and historic traditions, therefore if I was to write a letter to Jackie Smith, I'd more than likely appear on the front page of The Sun newspaper with the heading "Racist Pig" or words to that effect. :D

[Tacitus]

There is a more disturbing undercurrent to this.

I am thinking on my feet so to speak, so if it is not my normal well polished style, please forgive me. (WHERES THE SMILIES GONE???)

Na any way.

This was a private letter to a representative of Parliament. NOT an open letter, photocopied a million times and distributed on the street.

WHAT is a politician doing exposing his and his constituents private communications in public?

In this case HE was the one responsible for inciting hatred, because HE was the one to make it freely available for scrutiny. NOT Bardot.

As with the German constitution, the French guarantees a RIGHT to complain and to lobby politicians.

As I see it in this case, THAT constitutional right has now been modified to say "You have the right to complain, and lobby politicians, so long as you do not make your feelings known and so long as you say nothing bad about those ever so powerful muslim chappies".

NOW comes the REAL crunch!

This means that the muslims, who are only 4 to 5% of the French population are NOW IN CONTROL OF THE CONSTITUTION!!

They have, in this finding, swung it to THEIR advantage.

WHEN are enough people going to get together and tell our respective "Governments" that we have had bloody ENOUGH of this fifth column of dictators in our midst??

[Trouble43]

There is a more disturbing undercurrent to this.

I am thinking on my feet so to speak, so if it is not my normal well polished style, please forgive me. (WHERES THE SMILIES GONE???)

Na any way.

This was a private letter to a representative of Parliament. NOT an open letter, photocopied a million times and distributed on the street.

WHAT is a politician doing exposing his and his constituents private communications in public?

In this case HE was the one responsible for inciting hatred, because HE was the one to make it freely available for scrutiny. NOT Bardot.

As with the German constitution, the French guarantees a RIGHT to complain and to lobby politicians.

As I see it in this case, THAT constitutional right has now been modified to say "You have the right to complain, and lobby politicians, so long as you do not make your feelings known and so long as you say nothing bad about those ever so powerful muslim chappies".

NOW comes the REAL crunch!

This means that the muslims, who are only 4 to 5% of the French population are NOW IN CONTROL OF THE CONSTITUTION!!

They have, in this finding, swung it to THEIR advantage.

WHEN are enough people going to get together and tell our respective "Governments" that we have had bloody ENOUGH of this fifth column of dictators in our midst??

I have to agree with Thoreau here; PC is driving the entire situation out of hand. I know many people of ethnic communities, even the Muslim one, who think the government's stance of branding anyone who complains (however mildly) about people of colour/religion as racists as being very unhelpful.

I think the problem is the various european governments are listening to 'think tanks' and 'councils' that are very limited in their views - fundamentalists almost. This is not good - they should be listening to the moderate majority.

But what is the answer guys? As Tacitus says, anyone disagreeing is immediately sidelined; immediately hounded, even charged and imprisoned. At best you might be labelled racist and therefore almost considered evil by the current society - so if you can't speak out, what can you do? I don't know, I really don't. But when even the ethnic communities themselves are saying that the PC attitude is crippling society, that they fear this is making things even worse, then perhaps the governments need to listen to them (and us) a bit more and listen a bit less to the more hardlines groups that surround them?:confused:

[Tacitus]

This is difficult to believe. Three posts in one day, my first day back, and T43 and me agree on each one?

Intersting.

Have I changed, or have you, OR did we mwrely misunderstand each others style the first time around? :confused:;)

[Trouble43]

This is difficult to believe. Three posts in one day, my first day back, and T43 and me agree on each one?

Intersting.

Have I changed, or have you, OR did we mwrely misunderstand each others style the first time around?

Or perhaps a bit of all three?:confused:;)


But nice we can agree; long may it continue - well, until we get bored. LOL! seriously but I think that I have taken a step back and found a way to put a point across that (hopefully) without putting people's backs up.....hopefully...<fingers crossed smiley>

[Tacitus]

Quite. It must also be taken into account that German people CAN appear abrupt, because our language does not have the SAME "flowery bits" as English. We HAVE them, but they do not translate.

[Trouble43]

Quite. It must also be taken into account that German people CAN appear abrupt, because our language does not have the SAME "flowery bits" as English. We HAVE them, but they do not translate.

Well we Brits too get the hump if we think people are being rude - so probably crossed purposes?

Either way at least we can agree on these at the moment then.:)