An Adelaide man found to have vilified Jewish people on his website has been jailed after he failed to overturn a contempt of court finding.

Dr Fredrick Toben was originally sentenced to three months in jail for contempt, for repeated internet publication of material in breach of the Racial Discrimination Act.

Federal Court Justice Jeffrey Spender today said the case was not about the Holocaust, but whether Toben had complied with court orders.

All three judges dismissed an appeal against the contempt finding and upheld the three month sentence.

Toben was immediately taken into custody by federal police.

Quote:


As Soren & Calanen said - it was disobeying the Court Order, rather than what he actually said about Jews.

Muslims cop more than their fair share of abuse,

......but there are all sorts of laws in place to protect them. If you found a site (hopefully not this one) where Muslims are denigrated and threatened, Muslims would probably have some success gagging the site owner.

Toben's penalty does seem very harsh though - perhaps the Judge had a Jewish mother. You'd spend less time in gaol for stabbing someone.

I saw a documentary the other night on a Sharia Court in Nigeria. The people of this town, Christians and Muslims alike, chose to use Sharia Law because it was quicker and fairer and they didn't use solicitors.

It was very impressive because the magistrate, although harsh, was very intelligent. In 7 years there had only been 2 amputations and that was because the defendants chose not to appeal and welcomed the punishment because it brought them closer to Allah.

Even the public lashings for alcoholism were a great deterrant and crime which had previously created enormous problems had dropped to almost nothing.

[ISLAM is a death cult, and in a country such as Australia, ISLAM should be criticised, and ISLAM should be proscribed.

And much to abu's disappointment, i am sure!, i am not holding my breath [for such a circumstance to eventuate].

mantra,

A political and religious tyranny may produce fear, and superficial, observable, outward, compliance [to laws of a country].

But the fear created by

the violence of tyranny

, does not create a healthy, or a just society.

If it did, all Sharia jurisdictions, all moslem countries,

would be examples to us all

[to non-moslem societies], of how justice and peace can be achieved for mankind.

Yet, it is evident, that all, yes,

all

moslem / Sharia societies are violent, repressive, and unjust places.

I used Saudi Arabia as an example, because,

moslems themselves claim

that Sharia / moslem societies are

the

most just.

Mantra, excellent story, but unfortunately real/successful implementations of Shari'ah rarely make good news stories, that's why we don't see them in the mainstream. People like Yadda are quite content with Saudi Arabia, even though it's well known, even in many non-Muslim circles, that

Saudi is not a proper Shari'ah state, and it contains hundreds, if not thousands, of unjust laws that completely contradict Islam/Shari'ah.

Yadda - Saudi Arabia is one of the worst examples. This particular city I referred to in Nigeria consisted of both a Civil & Shariah Court, so the residents had a choice, but the Shariah Court was the most popular and used by Christians as well, who also voted to have Shariah Law introduced because of the escalating violence.

It was pointed out that this particular area was far less repressive than many other Muslim controlled areas, but it worked well for everyone.

I think we need to keep an open mind - not lump all Muslims in the same boat.

It's like using those barbaric and cannabalistic Christians in Africa, who practise voodoo, torture and witchcraft on small children in the name of Jesus Christ, as an example of all Christians.

NEW YORK: Yale University Press has been accused of cowardice and censorship after deciding not to reproduce cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed in an academic book for fear of violent reprisals.

Later this year the Press will publish a scholarly work about reactions to the cartoons printed in a Danish newspaper in 2005, which sparked protests around the world. But readers will not see the 12 cartoons that are the subject of the book, including one showing Mohammed with a turban like a bomb.

Yale has decided to publish The Cartoons That Shook the World, by Jytte Klausen, without any likenesses of the prophet.

The howls of protest are all the louder for the fact that there have not been any threats of violence related to the book. “‘We do not negotiate with terrorists. We just accede to their anticipated demands'. That is effectively the new policy position at Yale University Press," Cary Nelson, the president of the American Association of University Professors, wrote in an open letter.

Yale took its decision to self-censor after consulting two dozen experts, including counter-terrorism specialists and the highest-ranking Muslim official at the UN. Yale says that the experts concluded that the book should omit the 12 Danish cartoons. "You can count on violence if any illustration of the Prophet is published. It will cause riots, I predict, from Indonesia to Nigeria," Ibrahim Gambari, a top UN official, advised.

"My book is an academic book with footnotes and the notion that it would set off civil war in Nigeria is laughable," Ms Klausen told The Times. "The university spooked itself." Ms Klausen, who is a Danish-born professor of politics at Brandeis University in Massachusetts, argues in the book that the protests against the Danish cartoons were orchestrated by extremists seeking to destabilise several governments.

She says that Yale is magnifying the problem and that her book has become part of "a battle over the limits of freedom of speech".