A Quote by Poul Henningsen

The rules are rather simple to understand: Under democracy you can defend any view, but only defend it. You can not try to realise it through power, violence or weapons. — © Poul Henningsen
The rules are rather simple to understand: Under democracy you can defend any view, but only defend it. You can not try to realise it through power, violence or weapons.
Those who try to stifle the vibrancy of our democracy and shield policies from scrutiny behind a false cloak of patriotism miss the real value of what our troops defend and how we best defend our troops. We will ask questions and we will defend our democracy.
The truth comes to rule, not through violence, but rather through its own power; [this is the central theme of John's Gospel:] When brought before Pilate, Jesus professes that He Himself is The Truth and the witness to the truth. He does not defend the truth with legions but rather makes it visible through His Passion and thereby also implements it.
It is not enough to merely defend democracy. To defend it may be to lose it; to extend it is to strengthen it. Democracy is not property; it is an idea.
Changes are inseparable from democracy. To defend democracy is to defend the possibility of change; in turn, changes alone can strengthen democracy.
We are thus in the position of having to borrow from Europe to defend Europe, of having to borrow from China and Japan to defend Chinese and Japanese access to Gulf oil, and of having to borrow from Arab emirs, sultans and monarchs to make Iraq safe for democracy. We borrow from the nations we defend so that we may continue to defend them. To question this is an unpardonable heresy called 'isolationism.'
As I have shown, I will defend democracy with arms when it is threatened by violence; with firmness when it is weakened by division; with law and order when it is subverted by anarchy; and always, I will try to sustain it by wise policies of economic progress so that a democracy means not just an empty liberty, but a full life for all.
Defend the church. Defend the family. Defend the non-profit community. Defend them against a government that wants to weaken them.
It's simple-minded people like that, the ones that are afraid of change, they use everything in their power to defend what they stand up for instead of trying to listen and understand what's going on.
I'm able to defend. A lot of guys don't have that willingness to defend and I think as a guard who's undersized - that's what everybody says; I'm undersized - I'm able to defend and willing to defend and bring that.
We must defend democracy using its own mechanisms, through explaining and exemplifying its merits rather than through the heavy-handed and arbitrary silencing of its critics. This is how we will build a sustainable alternative to the contorted worldview of extremists.
Yes, we do defend our office as we do defend our homes. This is a constitutional right everybody has, and nothing's funny about that. The only reason they get mad at the Black Panther Party when you do it is for the simple reason that we're political.
I never want to be in a position where I have to defend my material. It's too subjective. It's for other people to defend or not defend.
The science of war leads one to dictatorship, pure and simple. The science of non-violence alone can lead one to pure democracy. Power based on love is thousand times more effective and permanent than power derived from fear of punishment. It is a blasphemy to say non-violence can be practiced only by individuals and never by nations which are composed of individuals. The nearest approach to purest anarchy would be a democracy based on non-violence. A society organized and run on the basis of complete non-violence would be the purest anarchy.
Defend the Bible? I would as soon defend a lion! Unchain it and it will defend itself.
Nuclear is the single greatest threat. Just to go down the list, we defend Japan, we defend Germany, we defend South Korea, we defend Saudi Arabia, we defend countries. They do not pay us. But they should be paying us, because we are providing tremendous service and we're losing a fortune. That's why we're losing - we're losing - we lose on everything. I say, who makes these - we lose on everything.
When Israelis in the occupied territories now claim that they have to defend themselves, they are defending themselves in the sense that any military occupier has to defend itself against the population they are crushing. You can't defend yourself when you're militarily occupying someone else's land. That's not defense. Call it what you like, it's not defense.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!