The State of Austria VS. Elisabeth: The Trial Begins Today


Elisabeth’s trial for “insulting a religion” resumes today, Henrik Clausen from EuropeNews will be feeding the Tundra Tabloids a live feed directly from the courtroom in Vienna. The trial is set to proceed at 9:00 this morning, 10:00 Finnish time. The Gates of Vienna has posted the state’s specific charges against Elisabeth, here.


NOTE: All pics taken by Henrik Raeder Clausen

10: 14: It’s a hazy day in Vienna, and we’re awaiting the start of the second hearing in the case against Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, who is charged with ”Inciting hatred” and ”Denigrating the teachings of a recognized religion” in her seminar to FPÖ about political Islam.

At the first hearing on 23rd November 2010, the basic charges were laid out, with the prosecutor quoting a few passages as foundation about the case, followed by ESW and her lawyer detailing the context for what was said, supplying details and sources for each.

Also the journalist from, Dolna, was present at the first hearing, where she was permitted to witness for the prosecutor, in spite of her not being called to do so. She was asked to explain various issues of her original article, including the reasons for attributing quotes from other people to ESW, and her use of remarks during the breaks as if they were parts of the seminar. She quoted ”Dramaturgic reasons” for doing so.

The current issue of has a follow-up to their original article, with references to the FPÖ chairman Heinz-Christian Strache supporting ESW. The article notes that in this hearing, actual evidence in the form of recordings from the seminar will be presented, stating that this is probably a bad idea for the defence.

We are certainly looking forward to actual evidence being presented, as not even the prosecutor had gone through the original evidence in the first hearing, relying instead on the transcript provided by A certified German translation of select passages of Reliance of the Traveller has been prepared by the defence, to document that the interpretations provided by ESW are indeed in line with canonical Islamic law.

ESW arrives. Session starts

10:52: Some 30 persons are present, including several journalists and Austrian television.

Defence hands over the translation of relevant parts of Reliance of the Traveller. The judge verifies basic personal facts about ESW, then proceeds directly to playing the seminar tapes. Noise is quite audible in the recordings. This goes to the heart of our problems with terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism, and will be reproduced in part here.

First issue taken up is the Muslim Brotherhood and its extensive political influence in Austria and Europe, and their desire to implement religious rule (Sharia) where possible, and the use of terrorism to pursue this objective. The lamentable lack of strong, moderate voices from Islam.

The Hadith is quoted, for it consists of what Muhammad did and said, the ideal for pious Muslims and the foundation for Sharia law, which basically codifies Quranic commandments and behaviour described in the Hadith into what is today Islamic law.

ESW: There is no Islam without Sharia, that cannot be separated. Sharia-based societies have been known for many centuries, and still exist today. The aim is to establish an order of society similar to that Muhammad had decreed and exemplified. The ultimate aim of Islamists today remains the same: To implement Sharia as widely as possible, ideally throughout the world. Sura 9:5 is an example of these:

Then when the Sacred Months (the Ist, 7th, 11th, and 12th months of the Islâmic calendar) have passed, then kill the Mushrikûn (see V.2:105) wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and prepare for them each and every ambush. But if they repent and perform As-Salât (Iqâmat-as-Salât), and give Zakât, then leave their way free. Verily, Allâh is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful

11:00 Next mentioned is Taqiyya – the permission and/or obligation to lie towards non-Muslims when doing so will further the cause of Islam. Quran, Bukhari and Muslim scriptural references are given for this. Also described in detailed in Reliance of the Traveller chapter 8.

Dr. Rami interrupts, asking for a clarification of the relevance of this passage. There seems to be a difference from the transcript. PowerPoint presentations are brought out to clarify.

The religious sanctioned lying is difficult for our politicians to handle. It is not clearly described in the Quran, is mainly based on Hadith, drawn on Muhammads’ tactics against his enemies.

Some discusssion with the audience follows. References are made to a variety of Quran verses, and the principle of abrogation in Islam.


11:12 Henrik says that there’s some kind of break happening presently. More to follow


11:00 Dr. Rami interrupts to point out that the quiet, factual tone of the seminar demonstrates that this is not hate speech, but an educational setting going through relevant documentation.

Dr. Rami also hightlights the question from the first seminar, if it would remain legal to say ”Islam is bullshit”, pointing out that this was not a statement of fact (visual ‘quoting’ had been used by ESW to indicate this). The relevant seminar recording is selected to be played next.

Back to the seminar tapes. Euro-Islam is discussed. ”Muslims hate us”. Elisabeth is heard saying: Who here would dare go in the street with a sign: ”Islam is Bullshit!”?

The judge discusses the charges, and the statement that the conduct of Muhammad is exemplary for Muslims, including the problem of Muhammad marrying a 6-year old girl, and what exactly that would be called today, if not paedophilia.

Dr. Rami interrupts the playback, pointing out that the purpose of playing the tapes has been accomplished, namely demonstrating that the sessions were scholary, throughoutly documented, and in no way constituted ”incitement to hatred” or similar.

NOTE. The judge has introduced a new point: discrimination of religious beliefs, the lawyer was not prepared for this point to be raised. That’s why the trial is over for now, with it being scheduled to resume on Feb 15.

This entry was posted in Interview. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to The State of Austria VS. Elisabeth: The Trial Begins Today

  1. cousinarlo says:

    Good luck to you in your fight, Ms Sabaditsch-Wolff.

    We in the west are in the battle of our lives to preserve the freedom to speak the truth. Our largest national news magazine Maclean’s successfully fought an attempt by Muslims to penalize it in a human rights court for quoting Mark Steyn. I hope for the same result for you.

    Islam will bulldoze our western societies into the ground if we do not stand up for what we believe.

  2. Pingback: Hate Speech Trial in Austria – don’t quote Koran unless you are Muslim? | Suffolk County Liberty Report

  3. Will Rice says:

    How is it in a world where belonging to the U.N. means a nation has signed accords carefully worded to encourage and preserve freedom of expression and of the press a thoroughly documented forensic enquiry into a belief [but by special dispensation especially Islam] – the journalism of Oriana Falacci for example – can be declared heretical and thereby, in a secular court of law no less, criminally punishable. That citing, as Ms Sabaditsch-Wolff did, written evidence allegedly declared to be ‘the whole truth and nothing other than the truth’ – by no less than their God, Prophet, and 13 centuries of his delegees, constitutes an incitement to hatred is insanity. When that twisted man was found to have kept his daughter as asex slave in a secret bunker I judged him a monster, hating his actions and whatever beliefs allowed or compelled his acts. I beg you answer: Was THAT improper? Did the journalists incite me to hatred? NO, they informed me of a truth in clear evidence and incited nothing. That monstrous paedophile inspired by his acts my righteous rage. The REPETITION of the story, declared by generations of Islamic holymen to be sacred and true, of Aisha’s violation at age 9 by the 54 year old Prophet DOESN’T inspire rage in decent people – the original scriptural declaration SHOULD.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *