Holocaust denier jailed in Germany

[Looger]

Originally Posted by RedHot25

Again, what if you are one of the groups/individuals that has this nonsense published about?

then you're free to:

ignore it.

publish a rebuttal.

call for the burning of anything you find offensive, the jailing of anyone you don't agree with, nanny state come take me away to utopia.

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by Looger

then you're free to:

ignore it.

publish a rebuttal.

call for the burning of anything you find offensive, the jailing of anyone you don't agree with, nanny state come take me away to utopia.

But what if you don't know about it?

What if you don't have the means to publish a rebuttal?

What if no one will listen to you?

I just don't think its as quite cut and dry as is portrayed.

[MarchHare]

What is actually harm, though?

You have classified it as basically physically doing something (lynching someone, for e.g.).

If Zundel speaks at a rally and says to the attendees, "go kill the Jews", and then there's attacks against Jewish people as a direct result, he's guilty of inciting violence and should be punished. If he publishes a book denying the Holocaust, but no crimes occur as a direct result, I'm really not seeing what he's done wrong (other than holding a really stupid belief, of course, but there's nothing illegal about that).

Is it harm, if you as a memeber of one of the identified groups, are hearing "you are an inferior race" or "the holocaust never occurred because it is a conspiracy by jewish people" or whatever actually is said...?

I've heard for years that my eternal soul will burn in the fires of Hell because I'm a heathen non-believer rather than a good Christian. I don't think I've been "harmed" by the people who express those views, and indeed, I will defend their right to state their beliefs. So instead of claiming that I was a victim somehow, I just tell those people that I disagree with them, which is the correct response when someone takes such an absurd and indefensible position as to claim that the Holocaust never happened.

Zundel has the right to publish his garbage. The rest of us have the right to tell him he's full of ****. That's the beauty of freedom of speech.

[worth]

Too bad. I'm allowed to publish whatever nonesense I want. Any group can write publish protest yell scream whatever they want about any subject.

You can't have the government saying it's ok to protest about this, but not about this. Or it's ok to write books about this subject, but not this subject.

Free speech should be unconditional in my view. Hate crimes are generally an impediment on free speech. Just because a view is preceived as wrong doesn't mean that is should be illegal to express. See Galileo.

Even if Zundell is completly wrong and out of his tree and all this stuff, I don't see how denying something happened as a crime. I also don't see it as spreading false news. There are a billion books on UFO's, monsters, coverups, conspiracies etc and I don't see any of them being labeled as spreading false news.

It's a slippery slope when we start regulating certain books as "spreading false news". I don't like to hear that at all.

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by Looger

wow.

the ADL, b'nai bri'ith, et al make example out of guys like zundel, and do nothing but reinforce the oversimplified 'jews run everything' argument in the minds of the easily swayed.

this is theater, this is manipulation, this is setting the stage for some ugly ugly stuff.

the ADL in the states has already tried to equate use of the terms 'neo-con' or questioning the official story on 9/11 with anti-semitism, and questioning JUST THE NUMBER of jews killed in the holocaust with holocaust denial.

if the ADL etc. really wanted to lessen hate crimes and hate in general they would not make heroes out of crackpots, they would not stir the pot.

i better qualify this because so many on this site are complete brainwipes - i am not saying that the anti-defamation league is responsible for all hate, but i find it pretty orwellian that all they do is defame.

I agree that giving that giving these guys more attention just makes their cause look legitimate and worth taking note. Just wanted to clarify what you were saying. But if everyone would ignore him, it would go away much more easily than locking him up.

this is theater, this is manipulation, this is setting the stage for some ugly ugly stuff.

What are you insinuating with this statement? Elaborate please.

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by worth

here are a billion books on UFO's, monsters, coverups, conspiracies etc and I don't see any of them being labeled as spreading false news.

It's a slippery slope when we start regulating certain books as "spreading false news". I don't like to hear that at all.

True but are books about "UFO's, monsters, coverups, conspiracies etc" the same as books saying millions of people didn't die, or saying one is race is better than the other, or?

I agree its a fine line, and I guess what I am saying is that I can see both sides. I work (well not right now, but my field) in a field were I can see, or hear about, a lot of the harm that is done from such statements. So that makes it hard there for me. But as well, I can see the angle of "police state", "what do you decide can be said/cannot", etc.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by RedHot25

But what if you don't know about it?

What if you don't have the means to publish a rebuttal?

What if no one will listen to you?

I just don't think its as quite cut and dry as is portrayed.

it's the very idea that someone saying boo is an act of violence, that is the problem here.

when i was living in BC one of my roomates came to calgary for a 'anti-racism' conference for her college, and i just howled when i read the itinerary and speaking points.

we are being turned into victims by being told what to be outraged by.

the actual hatred that exists in our society is not a lot, so it has to be magnified and prodded, it has to be made more than it is.

racist comments being made into felonies, thus become hurtful by their very recognition as such.

speak to anyone that has been discriminated against, anyone that has actually suffered REAL hatred and REAL abuse - it is usually quite enlightening.

meanwhile, back at the ranch, another neo-nazi rally busted as being run by an FBI informant:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...home-headlines

A paid FBI informant was the man behind a neo-Nazi march through the streets of Parramore that stirred up anxiety in Orlando's black community and fears of racial unrest that triggered a major police mobilization.

That revelation came Wednesday in an unrelated federal court hearing and has prompted outrage from black leaders, some of whom demanded an investigation into whether the February 2006 march was, itself, an event staged by law-enforcement agencies.

of course, people are always at the ready to say, as if on cue:

Others applauded the FBI's infiltration of the neo-Nazis.

"It's one of the largest extremist groups in the country, and Gletty was one of the most visible individuals in the National Socialist Movement," said Andy Rosenkranz, state regional director for the Anti-Defamation League. "Generally, the FBI and the JTTF (Joint Terrorism Task Force) in Florida does an excellent job."

just what percentage of rallys, hate literature, websites, etc. are directly run by the FBI or the ADL?

there's been some pretty interesting research on that, let me tell you...

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

The way I see it is this:

If members of the KKK lynch a black man, they deserve to be thrown in prison.

If members of the KKK attend a rally, speak of the "inferior negro race", publish books about white supremecy, but don't actually physically harm anyone, they've committed no crime in my view. They're free to say and publish whatever nonsense they want, and the rest of us are free to scoff at them for being a bunch of ignorant racist pigs.

And so it is with neo-Nazis and Holocaust deniers. They're free to write and speak about whatever craziness they want; they haven't broken any just law until a Jewish person is physically harmed as a direct result of their actions.

I totally agree... we are slowly turning into a really hypocritical, dysfunctional society. On one hand, its ridiculous to consider jailing people for adultery (which hurts people emotionally), but its understandable to jail people to hatemongering (which also hurts people emotionally)... I don't get it. To me, part of being a responsible, savvy society is allowing everyone free speech, and having all viewpoints open for scrutiny... even the moronic crackpots. They have the right to expression, and we have the reciprocal right to look down on them for being ignorant. "I may disagree with what you say sir, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

[Daradon]

Fear everyone looger. Fear them so much you side with the neo-nazis

This is ridiculous.

[Daradon]

Due dilligence should be done, but now your justifying hate crimes.

I guess child porn will be next.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by Daradon

Fear everyone looger. Fear them so much you side with the neo-nazis

This is ridiculous.

why would i side with the FBI?

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by Looger

it's the very idea that someone saying boo is an act of violence, that is the problem here.

Hey looger. Fair enough, that's your opinion. Some of the stuff does go to far at times, I agree.

However, you would be surprised at what stuff is out there...I'm not talking about someone saying "boo" either.

All I am saying is that I can see both sides to the argument

[Looger]

Originally Posted by Daradon

Due dilligence should be done, but now your justifying hate crimes.

what? where did i do that?

Originally Posted by Daradon

I guess child porn will be next.

well, i guess we should just search your hard drive, and in so doing, well maybe we'll plant something on it.

child porn found!

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by Looger

why would i side with the FBI?

Ahhh I didn't say you did, in fact I didn't even mention the FBI (truthfully I wasn't even thinking it)

Like ink blots, why did this come to your head?

Again, creating your own enemies.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by Daradon

Ahhh I didn't say you did, in fact I didn't even mention the FBI (truthfully I wasn't even thinking it)

Like ink blots, why did this come to your head?

Again, creating your own enemies.

nope.

YOU'RE the one that thinks to side me 'with the neo-nazis', meanwhile i said in this thread that a goal of lionizing guys like zundel is to push the simple-minded into the arms of hate organizations.

someone's sure creating something around here...

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Daradon

Due dilligence should be done, but now your justifying hate crimes.

I guess child porn will be next.

That's a classic example of a slippery-slope fallacy with a bit of a strawman worked in for good measure. Under no circumstances would I defend child porn, as its production involves the exploitation of minors.

On the other hand, and to bring us back to the current debate of this thread, I will defend porn made by and for consenting adults. Larry Flynt is guaranteed the write to publish his filth, and you're perfectly free not to buy it. Or to write an angry letter to Hustler Enterprises about it. Or whatever other form of protest you can think of.

[FireFly]

If you talk loud enough and long enough, people are going to listen. If you talk about hatred in this same manner to people who cannot think for themselves, you're going to teach them to hate. Isn't that how the Holocaust started in the first place? However, in a day and age where we have already witnessed such atrocities, it is much harder to get anyone to listen to what you are saying and believe in your cause. In this case, the 'other side' is talking just as loud and just as long and has more evidence to back up their argument. It's a person's right to believe whatever they want, (all of a sudden this sounds like a debate on religion with Cheese... funny how that works out, isn't it?) to say whatever they want, to discuss whatever they want. It is not until they act on those feelings that a potential crime is committed, depending on the action.

In how many years of spewing his garbage has he actually garnered a large number of supporters? How many hate crimes are acted out because of the things he says? He's been at this for what, 30 years? You'd think that if what he was doing was going to incite people into random acts of violence, we'd have heard of this violence long before now... and if there is such violence, then those individual acts are treated as such. There are many forms of abuse, one of which is purely mental. However, in this case, and in any case of using freedom of speech for hate purposes, there is no mental abuse towards those who are being hated... a person's worth is not judged by the colour of their skin or their religious affiliations, and I'm pretty certain the majority of the population have gotten that message by now. Those who haven't will be left behind while the rest of humankind evolves.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

That's a classic example of a slippery-slope fallacy with a bit of a strawman worked in for good measure. Under no circumstances would I defend child porn, as its production involves the exploitation of minors.

On the other hand, and to bring us back to the current debate of this thread, I will defend porn made by and for consenting adults. Larry Flynt is guaranteed the write to publish his filth, and you're perfectly free not to buy it. Or to write an angry letter to Hustler Enterprises about it. Or whatever other form of protest you can think of.

Awesome, I'll defend porn too!

I won't defend this guy, and it doesn't mean I hate free speech.

[MarchHare]

I won't defend this guy, and it doesn't mean I hate free speech.

Please don't mistake my position. I'm not defending Zundel. His claim that the Holocaust did not occur is wrong wrong wrong. He's an ignorant SOB.

What I am defending is his right to free speech.

I don't view his beliefs any differently than those of people who claim that a magical space pixie created the universe in six days or people who think that the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001 were a conspiricy committed by the American government. I may disagree with those views in the strongest possible terms, but I will absolutely support anyone's right to express them.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Please don't mistake my position. I'm not defending Zundel. His claim that the Holocaust did not occur is wrong wrong wrong. He's an ignorant SOB.

What I am defending is his right to free speech.

I don't view his beliefs any differently than those of people who claim that a magical space pixie created the universe in six days or people who think that the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001 were a conspiricy committed by the American government. I may disagree with those views in the strongest possible terms, but I will absolutely support anyone's right to express them.

I agree with your argument.

I believe he went past that though. A recreating of events (which like you said may be like conspiracy theorists) but with the intention of undermining a race or society.

Not a ruling class, not a government, but a people.

I could be wrong but that's what it seems like happened.