Consistent inconsistency.

9 03 2009

Via Jihad Watch: Muslim attorney in the Netherlands refuses to rise when judge enters:

enait_145316c.jpg
He won’t stand for Dutch law

Mohammed Enaït refuses to rise for Dutch judges — a clear indication that he does not respect them, or the system of law they represent. He respects only the law he considers to be divine law, the Sharia, and is no doubt working to bring about its triumph.

“Muslim attorney refuses to rise for judges,” a translation of this Dutch article, with bracketed comments in bold from the Dutch Freedom Blog, March 3:

THE HAGUE – Mohammed Enaït, the ’sitting attorney’ still refuses to rise for the court when it comes in session. He will continue to do so even if he were to be reprimanded by the Council of Discipline. He is prepared to continue litigating up to the European Court of Human Rights. [oooooh……] This, at least, is what the lawyer from Rotterdam told the Council of Discipline, the Dutch Order of Advocates’ internal court. It is common practice to rise for the court when the judges enter the Chamber as a sign of respect [respect for the rule of law in the Kingdom of the Netherlands actually] . Because Enaït refuses to do so [why? Doesn`t he respect the rule of law?] , the dean of the Order of Advocates started disciplinary proceedings against him six months ago. [good!]

Enait is an orthodox muslim [No, really?] and says he does not rise for a judge for religious reasons. [showing disrespect for the rule of law … for religious reasons!]. According to the novice lawyer [he’s actually a trainee attorney. My question is who the heck offers a pupillage to a wingnut of this stature?] the complaint was lodged solely because of religious reasons and white colleagues are never approached about similar complaints. [ehr… are there any examples of ‘white’ attorneys – or black ones for that matter that refuse to rise for the court? No? I didn`t think so.]

The dean, W.H. Claassen, emphasized that this case is about general rules of behaviour ina court of law and that this case is not about human rights issues, religion or freedom of expression. [if you want freedom of expression, try a less offensive way] The Council of Discipline will rule on this matter May 4 next. [I can`t wait]

Disclaimer: this is a commented newspaper article originally published in Dutch. The translation is mine unless otherwise noted. This translation is posted solely for the purposes of public debate and public information. This blog is and will remain strictly non-profit and I make no claim to the copyright of either the original text or any graphic material included herein – posting commented translations for non-commercial purposes of public debate constitutes fair use under US copyright law. This blog is hosted in the United States of America and is therefore constitutionally protected speech as defined under the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.

It’s nice to see religion’s respect for the secular world. This is the same court which is prosecuting Geert Wilders on behalf of people just like this fellow? People with little to no respect for Dutch law? They’re the ones which the law is accommodating to the expense of the freedom of a politician – a man who holds great respect for Holland’s tradition of law?

At least they’re consistent in their inconsistency.

Oh hey, while you’re reading, check out Filip Dewinter. He’s written an anti-Islamic book. Wonder if he’ll be the next Geert Wilders? Or perhaps even the next Theo Van Gogh or Pim Fortyn, in which case we’ll just have to wait for the report of his death at the hands of radicals in the streets of some major Western city.

Advertisements

Actions

Information

4 responses

10 03 2009
Steynian 333 « Free Canuckistan!

[…] CONSISTENT inconsistency: Via Jihad Watch: Muslim attorney in the Netherlands refuses to rise when judge […]

12 03 2009
How To Spot Bogus Fake Degrees | Online Educational Resources

[…] Consistent inconsistency. « Defend Geert Wilders […]

12 03 2009
jo

This muslim should be deported. He had to have lied when applying for citizenship, since he does not respect nor accept the Netherlands. Most immigrants have to swear loyalty to the new country before they can become a citizen. If he was actually born in the Netherlands, boot him out of the courtroom and keep him out. Also, investigate his background to see where he acquired anti-Netherland ideas and shut the venue down. To anyone who thinks this is overkill, just imagine what would happen to any lawyer in a muslim country who showed such disrespect to a judge.

13 03 2009

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




%d bloggers like this: