What's next – jailing flat-Earth fans?

[rkwright]

I'm still holding that this man holds to anti-semetic views, and uses his academic position to deny the holocaust to further his ideology. (if this is the same man from the UK that was in the news for being arrested in austria a few months ago).

No one should have the right to further genocide or its ideology.

I'm glad austria stood up for this and works to ensure people like Hitler can't come to power again.

However, like Era said
[quote]If you are simply arguing against this specific act of moderation, I have no problem. I disagree, but it is a legitimate opinion.[/quote]

I guess we can all agree to disagree.

Edited February 24, 2006 by rkwright

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='rkwright' date='Feb 24 2006, 12:02 AM']I'm still holding that this man holds to anti-semetic views, and uses his academic position to deny the holocaust to further his ideology.  (if this is the same man from the UK that was in the news for being arrested in austria a few months ago). 

No one should have the right to further genocide or its ideology. 

I'm glad austria stood up for this and works to ensure people like Hitler can't come to power again.

However, like Era said
I guess we can all agree to disagree.
[right][snapback]896369[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Yes I would agree a man that denines the Holocaust would have anti-semetic views, and yes he should not use his academic position to deny the holocaust.

But that is not good enuff reason to throw out the freedom of speech and replace it with a waterdown verison married to a hate crime law. The man should have been fired, not put in prison where he may become a "martyr"

Has he furthered genocide? It is my understanding in the case of the Holocaust he denines it.

I am very displeased Austria turned its back to freedom. Hate crime laws could very well make it easier for evil people like Hitler to come to power again. After all Hilter promised peace and unity, hate crime laws promise the same.

[sidemunch88]

[quote]Generally when people try to suppress a viewpoint, it is because they lack a coherent rebuttal.[/quote]

amen

btw, it doesn't sound like he denied the holocaust...unless denying gas chambers at one concentration camp is denying the holocaust

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='sidemunch88' date='Feb 24 2006, 12:38 AM'] amen

btw, it doesn't sound like he denied the holocaust...unless denying gas chambers at one concentration camp is denying the holocaust
[right][snapback]896379[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Ah, yes I forgot... still that is dening at least part of the Holocaust...

[sidemunch88]

that isn't what he was charged with. He was charged for DENYING THE HOLOCAUST. He denied part of it.

[cmotherofpirl]

I am not for yelling fire in a crowded theater. That is not what the guy did. He published his version of gernam history. If he is wrong, prove it, discredit his ideas, fire him if you want.
But you don't put people in jail for ideas, because then you are doing exactly what hitler DID.

[Didacus]

I believe the core of the argument centers around:

[quote]Generally when people try to suppress a viewpoint, it is because they lack a coherent rebuttal. [/quote]

If a coherent rebuttal is present, then why not sit at a debate and denounce his point of view.

the best way to kill a lie is to show it for what it is.

Jailling them only fuels speculation and interest in these ideas.
=========================

[quote]I am not for yelling fire in a crowded theater. That is not what the guy did. He published his version of gernam history. If he is wrong, prove it, discredit his ideas, fire him if you want.
But you don't put people in jail for ideas, because then you are doing exactly what hitler DID.[/quote]

This is precisely my thoughts in a nutshell.

but the point of the article; "He is jailed because of fear of the debate." does retain some interest to me.

I believe that several facts on the holocaust are hidden, distorted, exagerated and require clarification.

I believe it happened; don't get me wrong here. But if there are certain 'holes' in history which are questionable, even on such a sensitive subject, by all means they must be questionned, reasonned, rebutted and closed. You do not just put people in jail and perpetuate ignorance.

Edited February 24, 2006 by Didacus

[Didacus]

[quote name='sidemunch88' date='Feb 24 2006, 12:38 AM'] amen

btw, it doesn't sound like he denied the holocaust...unless denying gas chambers at one concentration camp is denying the holocaust
[right][snapback]896379[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Excellent point.

You really have to be alarmed when just picking at a 'detail' of history becomes a crime.

[rkwright]

Here is what the German Federal Court said in 1994 when Holocaust Denial came before their equal of a supreme court.

[quote]"In weighing the importance of free speech against that of individual rights, courts must consider on the one hand the severity of the offense caused by Holocaust denial to the Jewish population in light of the suffering inflicted upon it by Germany," the court wrote at the time. "This court has consistently protected the personal honor of those defamed above the right of others to make patently false statements."[/quote]

There is another man on trial in Germany right now. This is what the Germans say of him.

[quote]According to prosecutors, Ernst Zündel is one of the "most active" Holocaust deniers today. He began distributing Nazi and neo-Nazi propaganda in the 1970s and has written several books praising Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime. Since 1995, he has been associated with a Web site that carries his name and is one of biggest online repositories of Holocaust-denial propaganda.[/quote]

These men are not doing for this for freedom of speech, they are using to further Nazi and Neo-Nazi propaganda, which of course is a terrorist group.

In America we can be arrested just as easily for furthering Al-Queda propganda. Its no different. The Neo-Nazi's are still a problem in Europe, they are a terrorist group and still kill people to this day based on race.

[cmotherofpirl]

The best way to shut an idiot up is to prove him wrong, jailing him makes a martyr of him.

[rkwright]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Feb 24 2006, 12:15 PM']The best way to shut an idiot up is to prove him wrong, jailing him makes a martyr of him.
[right][snapback]896656[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

maybe, but look at the german courts. They value the honor for the defamed dead over the idiots lies.

I haven't seen anything that seems to make this man a martyr? A rise in neo-nazis?

[Nathan]

I think jailing this man is wrong. People should be free to believe whatever they want regarding the Holocaust, or anything else for that matter -- and express both beliefs in published material should they so choose. I'm not a fan of state-sanctionced history.

Edited February 24, 2006 by Nathan

[Didacus]

If the case of Ernst Zündel is as you describe it then the charge should be based on propaganda, not in terms of a single belief.

Slander for example, or a variation thereof. Charge him with lying if you will.

In comparaison, if someone genuinely questions the holocaust and supports it with facts of his/her own, how can this be wrong? If someone is presenting not simply an opinon, but an opinion based on events that he/she can prove or support?

If someone deliberately spreads propaganda with the intent of being harmful to others, I agree something should be done. But someone who genuinely questions events as they are recorded in history; they should be rebutted, but not put in jail.