-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Quote:
Originally Posted by QwertyMIDX
Also, there is the fact that what Austria is doing to Irving is a blatant violation of the EU Charter of Fudenmental Rights. Article 11, section 1 is pretty clear on this:
Emphasis mine.
It doesn't seem like there is a lot of room for argument here. It pretty much undermines this one completely:
Of course one could argue (and it actually is argued) that holocaust-denial violates the fundamental right that is guaranteed in the very first article: human dignity (i.e., the dignity of those who were victims of the Holocaust)
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Of course, but the clarity of the wording in article 11 makes the case for his right to say it a much easier argument. Arguing that it violates article 1 requires quite a bit of reading between the lines.
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Quote:
Originally Posted by QwertyMIDX
Arguing that it violates article 1 requires quite a bit of reading between the lines.
Granted - but as "human dignity" naturally leaves much more room for interpretation than "freedom of expression" this is not surprising.
-
Re: Re : Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
Nope. They`re ruining others property.
As long as they don`t are racistic and/or incites to violence, Nazis can do whatever they want towithout me caring(apart from damaging other properties and alike).
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
I reluctantly agree that he shouldn't be punished.
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
A couple of weeks ago there has been an article on this case in "Der Spiegel":
The Swastika Wielding Provocateur
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ser Clegane
Granted - but as "human dignity" naturally leaves much more room for interpretation than "freedom of expression" this is not surprising.
Not really, freedom of expression is one of most contentious rights ever dreamed up political theorists, which is of course why we're having this debate in the first place. You're argument about Human Dignity overuling freedom of expression could also be used to ban things like the dear, sweet danish cartoon, or my saying the Tony Blair is a big eared sellout, somehow I don't think that's the ideology behind article 1.
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
In the public square, people should be free to be stupid.
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
“Now to compare this situation to the Muslim's who are offended by the cartoons of the prophet would be in order.” Yes, let’s compare… One guy, not alone in Europe at theses times, denied the holocaust. He said that the number of victims were exaggerated (four millions instead of six should probably more acceptable?) and well, it was the war. He did that in Austria, which was heavily involved in Nazism (Hitler is Austrian…). A former UN General Secretary, Kurt Waldheim, Austrian, was in the SS… Hitler wasn’t aware of the extermination (never heard of Nacht and Nebel neither), it was a big misunderstanding… The fact that the Nazis never denied the fact (quiet difficult, anyway) never occurred to him and those like him. Because the goal is to put doubts in the mind of people who will never read a book, will never visit one camp, will never read the plaque when the cross the tunnel between Germany and Austria reminding who built him and at what price.
These theses were every where in Europe, spread by pseudo-historians, “negationists” from every country… They were not interested in facts but motivated by ideology. If you deny the reality of Extermination Camps, you can say that the treatment of the Boer population by the English is the same thing. You erase the unique reality of Nazism, the State planned to kill an entire population. They built an infrastructure to achieve this goal. They made researches to be more efficient.
It is not an OPINION; it is a denial of reality, of specificity. He never really try to study the process, he just said it never happened.
Debate about Hitler, if the Allies knew about the extermination, etc, all that exist today. That is part of a normal historical process to question what we think and believe. It is allowed by the law.
To publish jokes and cartoons about the extermination and the SS is allowed. You can like the joke or not, that is joke. They probably hurt and offend people who suffered from them, but it exists. I remember one comic named Strumtrooper which did it. Even if my own family suffered from the Gestapo, I found it funny. It was black humour; it happened and wasn’t censured…
Now, the Muslim anger is against one PICTURE… And to laugh about religion is allow by the law.
The attempt to link both case, if not unexpected, is laughable…
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Quote:
Originally Posted by QwertyMIDX
somehow I don't think that's the ideology behind article 1.
On the contrary - this is exactly the ideology behind article 1
European and US constistutionalism - comparing essential elements
Excerpts:
Quote:
The same is true for the case of Lehideux v. France.16 In this case the French authorities had applied a law which prescribed that French history during the time of the German occupation may not be ‘falsified’. Two persons were convicted who had described General Pétain, the leader of the Vichy puppet government, as a patriotic figure by emphasising certain of his deeds and leaving out others which most people would regard as crucial, in particular the Vichy regime’s policy of persecution of Jews. These persons had not, however, denied this persecution or the holocaust as such. Again, the judgment of the European Court is liberal only in a very limited sense: the Court took pains to declare that holocaust denial and Nazi propaganda can be punished, and are even outside the scope of protection of the freedom of expression, and it only held that in the case at hand the issue was still within the realm of legitimate historical debate.17
Quote:
Another reason why freedom of speech occupies such a different place in European and US constitutionalism may be related to the second topic of this book, human dignity. Human dignity is a comparatively modern legal term.25 It is therefore not surprising that the term is not mentioned in the US Constitution, but is in a good number of post-war European constitutions as well as in international human rights instruments. The stimulus for the career of human dignity as a legal term is widely perceived to come from the global sense of unprecedentedness which the Nazi and other atrocities gave rise to, and the corresponding discovery of an even more fundamental legal right (or value) than the classical ‘life, liberty and property’.26 In a sense, therefore, the reason for recognising and proclaiming human dignity in post-war European constitutional texts can be seen as being structurally similar to why a need was felt to punish perpetrators for crimes against humanity and not merely for murder or enslavement. This reading of the history of the term human dignity as a constitutional concept easily explains why it has been more prevalent in Europe than in the United States. In America, the European experience which gave rise to the concept was simply not felt to be relevant.
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis IV the Fat
Are these graffiti artists merely excercising their right to freedom of expression too?
Nobody is denying him the right to say his message. They restrict where it may be said. It is not legitimate to destroy another's property by putting your message on it. What the Austrian government is doing is telling him he cannot say it no matter what mode he uses to express it. It is not an acceptable mode to kill another person to express your dislike of them. You may certainly express your dislike through words though.
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
So Louis, Ser C, et. al.... it is your position that by allowing David Irving to utter his rubbish, the basic human dignity of the victims of the Shoah is being eroded?
Isn't that giving David Irving more power than his lunatic fringe rantings deserve? Wouldn't the ultimate rejection of Irving's garbage be....not imprisonment, not repudiation, censoring or even villification, but to give his ideas the time and consideration they deserve, which is none at all?
Wouldn't it be far better to just ignore turds like this guy, and every once is a blue moon, if his ravings get any sort of traction at all, trot out some evidence proving just how foolishly wrong he really is (and ideally, not in direct response to?) In my mind, the Shoah memorial in Washington DC is a far better answer to the David Irving's of the world then laws that carry prison sentances.
As for the grafitti issue, well, now you're hitting us where it counts Louis, property rights. Sure, you have a right to your message, but you have no right to impact the property value of my property, or that of a 3rd party in your effort to express it.
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
“Now to compare this situation to the Muslim's who are offended by the cartoons of the prophet would be in order.” Yes, let’s compare… One guy, not alone in Europe at theses times, denied the holocaust. He said that the number of victims were exaggerated (four millions instead of six should probably more acceptable?) and well, it was the war. He did that in Austria, which was heavily involved in Nazism (Hitler is Austrian…). A former UN General Secretary, Kurt Waldheim, Austrian, was in the SS… Hitler wasn’t aware of the extermination (never heard of Nacht and Nebel neither), it was a big misunderstanding… The fact that the Nazis never denied the fact (quiet difficult, anyway) never occurred to him and those like him. Because the goal is to put doubts in the mind of people who will never read a book, will never visit one camp, will never read the plaque when the cross the tunnel between Germany and Austria reminding who built him and at what price.
So you advocate placing him in jail because he believes a revisionist type of history based upon denial?
Quote:
These theses were every where in Europe, spread by pseudo-historians, “negationists” from every country… They were not interested in facts but motivated by ideology. If you deny the reality of Extermination Camps, you can say that the treatment of the Boer population by the English is the same thing. You erase the unique reality of Nazism, the State planned to kill an entire population. They built an infrastructure to achieve this goal. They made researches to be more efficient.
Yes indead idealogical based belief is evident in his statements. Something to be ridiculed for what it is.
Quote:
It is not an OPINION; it is a denial of reality, of specificity. He never really try to study the process, he just said it never happened.
And here is where you are incorrect - its his opinion based upon his denial of reality. So you are advocating sending someone to jail because of denial in his speech?
Quote:
Debate about Hitler, if the Allies knew about the extermination, etc, all that exist today. That is part of a normal historical process to question what we think and believe. It is allowed by the law.
Freedom of Speech is also allowed by law. However it seems dissenting view points of based upon opinions is not allowed if it crosses into certain subjects.
Quote:
To publish jokes and cartoons about the extermination and the SS is allowed. You can like the joke or not, that is joke.
you just crossed into the point without knowing it.
Quote:
They probably hurt and offend people who suffered from them, but it exists. I remember one comic named Strumtrooper which did it. Even if my own family suffered from the Gestapo, I found it funny. It was black humour; it happened and wasn’t censured…
Okay now your beginning to get the point.
Quote:
Now, the Muslim anger is against one PICTURE… And to laugh about religion is allow by the law.
But to deny the holocaust happen is against the law. So in other words Free Speech has limits placed upon it, based upon the society.
That one picture crosses into what they believe to be blasamy, they are entitled to voice their outrage against that picture, and to demand an apology from the paper in that regards. They are not exercising responsible Freedom of Speech when they riot, but in protesting their anger at the paper they are exercising their rights, just as the artist that drew the picture exercised his right to free speech.
Quote:
The attempt to link both case, if not unexpected, is laughable…
Oh they are exactly the same, the link exists, both are free speech issues. What is laughable is that bigots come in all types. It seems in being intolerant of bigots some are advocating bigotary of a different type.
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Corleone
So Louis, Ser C, et. al.... it is your position that by allowing David Irving to utter his rubbish, the basic human dignity of the victims of the Shoah is being eroded?
From the article I linked to in a previous post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Spiegel
It isn't Irving's books that landed him in prison, but his lectures -- sentences like this one, which he dictated to an Austrian reporter in 1989: "There were no gas chambers in Auschwitz. All witnesses who claim otherwise are psychiatric cases." Indeed, the Vienna public prosecutor's office plans to use tape recordings of some of Irving's appearances in Austria as part of its indictment.
To answer your question - yes, I think that statements like this violate the human dignity of the victims.
Would ignoring guys like him be the best thing to do? Probably.
However, a survivor who had to witness that his/her beloved ones were led to the gas chambers might see this differently.
Free speech is a right that needs all the protection it can get - and many people here in Germany were killed for not being willing to give it up - however, with rights come responsibilities, and Mr. Irving has, IMHO abused his right of free speech by mocking the victims of the Shoah/Holocaust.
EDIT to add: I agree however, that in the end the jail sentence might be counter-productive by turning Irving into a martyr (but I wouldn't disagree with the sentence for the sake of protection of free speech)
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
If I was a David Irving type, you know what would get me hard, so to speak? Invoking enough fear in people that they felt the need to imprison me. Do you know what would frustrate and infuriate me beyond reason? To have people, especially Jewish people, laugh at me.
I know what he says is deeply offensive. It's worse than that, it's vile, and it strongly implies a desire to bring that sort of wickedness to the light of day once again. But by driving the David Irvings of the world underground, you push them towards places where they might prosper while in hiding.
The best place for the class dunce is right up on a stool in front of the whole class, for everyone to acknowledge and laugh at. Only when we see these idiots ~:joker: for who and what they are do we have a chance at keeping them where they belong, right up there on the dunce stool. It's the tolerance of the most offensive statements of this sort that allow us to keep Pat Buchanan around as a useful buffoon (and I think he's flirted with the idea of holocaust denial on several occassions himself).
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Clearly he shouldn't be put in jail, free speech is a wonderful thing especially because it makes us face up to and confront that which we do not agree with / take for granted. But because he shouldn't go to jail doesn't mean he shouldn't be stood up to and his arguments shown to be flawed - which thankfully has already been done when he lost his court battle a few years ago.
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke of Gloucester
This is the strongest argument for his not saying the things in the first place and then being vilified when he did, but I don’t think we should send people to jail for being offensive, even if they are really offensive.
People who deny the mistreatment of Germans by the Russians after WWII insult me, my family and the victims of those crimes, but there's no law against it. People who deny the Armenian and Hellenic Genocides offend the victims of those, alive or dead, but there are no laws against that. People who deny the genocide of... [et cetera, et cetera, et cetera]
Democrats offend me. Hugo Chaves offends me. Socialists offend me. Communists offend me. But there aren't any laws against those.
I'm sure I offend alot of people, but I'm not outlawed (yet).
So really, does it matter if something's offensive? Freedom of speech covers this type of hogwash and, no matter how deranged it is, as long as no one is directly, physically hurt over it, it is his right to say it as far as I'm concerned.
Europe preaches to America about civil rights, but they don't even know what freedom of speach is.
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Europe preaches to America about civil rights, but they don't even know what freedom of speach is.
Err ....who is it that keeps closing down Zundels site and the Earl Kruger "memorial" sites Capo ?
Don't climb on that high horse , you might fall off :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiser of Arabia
Socialists offend me.
Bar one, young man; I have never offended you.
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianII
Bar one, young man; I have never offended you.
Socialism in general offends my sensibilities, adrian :sweatdrop:
Though as far as I know, we cool.
-
Re : Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Corleone
it is your position that by allowing David Irving to utter his rubbish, the basic human dignity of the victims of the Shoah is being eroded?
Yes. Their blood is my hereditary sin. I can not undo what happened, I can stand guard over the dignity of their souls.
But - sparing you all a 600 page-long exposé on this subject and cutting straight to the conclusion - I must in the end agree with this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Saturnus
I reluctantly agree that he shouldn't be punished.
http://www.my-smileys.de/smileys2/tutmirleid.gif
-
Re: Re : Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
Yes. Their blood is my hereditary sin. I can not undo what happened, I can stand guard over the dignity of their souls.
But - sparing you all a 600 page-long exposé on this subject and cutting straight to the conclusion - I must in the end agree with this:
http://www.my-smileys.de/smileys2/tutmirleid.gif
Wow, Louis, late night? It's humanity's task to keep it in the forefront of our minds. If there's any such thing as collective guilt, there's plenty to be spread far and wide. But it goes deeper than that. The Shoah stands in modern history as an example of just how far we as predatory apes haven't come. If we allow ourselves to forget, it might be us running the camps next time, or it might be us in them.
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Even depending on what the fella said verbatim, Freedom of Speech is Freedom of Speech.
Feel free to ridicule, heck even to agree.
-
Re : Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don
Wow, Louis, late night?
Nah - you should be familiar by now with French' fondness for the pompous statement. A nation of great thoughts requires a great language. :book:
-
Re: Re : Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
Nah - you should be familiar by now with French' fondness for the pompous statement. A nation of great thoughts requires a great language. :book:
That's why French, as a language, is horrible, and German, as a language, rox0rz. :laugh4:
-
Re : Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiser of Arabia
People who deny the mistreatment of Germans by the Russians after WWII insult me, my family and the victims of those crimes, but there's no law against it. People who deny the Armenian and Hellenic Genocides offend the victims of those, alive or dead, but there are no laws against that. People who deny the genocide of... [et cetera, et cetera, et cetera]
Good point, lad. There are laws about the Armenian genocide though.
Here's a brief article about some current developments in France about this subject, dealing with both the Shoah and Armenia and the awkward position you can get yourself into when trying to balance political correctness and freedom of speech:
Quote:
French historians issued a common declaration to annul all parliamentary historical decisions, including the Armenian genocide law.
The discussion on “rewriting history” that flared in France last week is gradually intensifying.
“The duty of rewriting history in a free country does not belong to the parliament or any legal authorities,” the French historians stated. Parliamentary decisions, they defended, make it difficult to conduct research on history and education.
Four years ago, the French Parliament recognized the incidents of 1915 as the “Armenian genocide” despite Turkey’s harsh objections. In the single-paragraph law passed with pressure from the Armenian Diaspora in France, the statement “France clearly recognizes the 1915 Armenian genocide,” is noted.
A Paris Court ruled against famous French encyclopedia, The Quid, for printing the Turkish view on the so-called Armenian genocide last July. The same court had previously ruled against famous historian Bernard Lewis for a relevant article he published in the newspaper Le Monde and ordered him to pay a symbolic sum in compensation of one euro.
Tension mounts over the motion suggesting that school textbooks “should particularly teach the positive sides of French colonialism,” which was adopted in the French parliament in February; a decision that shocked French historians.
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Who would have thought that Austria would have been so touchy about Nazi propaganda and rabble-rousing? I mean, I wonder what historical reason they could have for having such laws?
It is part of their penence, part of the debt they and every country which surrendered its Jews must pay in some form. Who else should be the guardians of the Holocaust's horrors than those who were involved? A fitting task I think.
If a foolish man like Irving wants to challenge that then fair enough, and he will pay the price if found guilty. It happens to be prison because fines obviously have no effect, and I doubt such a man fears humiliation either. Besides which he was warned that he faced arrest and still went back, presumably as some kind of stunt. Maybe they should find him a Jewish cellmate.
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Just another Orgite weighing in, saying that this idiot should not be imprisoned. He is not directly inciting murder or violence, he's just being a obnoxious jerk. He should have the right to be as big of an ass as he'd like to be, and the rest of us should heartily mock him. Jeers and laughter (with lots of finger pointing) are the appropriate response, not jail time.
Things you cannot be put in jail for:
- Denying the Rwandan genocide
- Denying the Cambodian genocide
- Denying Stalin's purges
- Denying the mass starvation of the Great Leap Forward
- Denying that anything naughty happened when Yugoslavia broke up
- Denying that any Turk ever laid a hand on an Armenian
- Denying the Native American genocide (North America, by English, Dutch, French and Ameriacns)
- Denying the Native American genocide (Central America, by Spain)
- Denying the Native American genocide (South America, by Spain and Portugal)
- Denying the Native American genocide (Carribean, by everybody in Europe with a boat)
- Denying the Congo genocide (by the Belgians)
- Denying the Congo genocide (by the Congolese)
- Denying the Congo genocide (by five neighboring countries)
- Denying the Darfur genocide
When I lived in Chicago, there was a synagouge that had the confusing sign out front for a year: "Never again means now." I think they got mixed up when writing the slogan, but the literal meaning is surprisingly accurate, if not what they intended.
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Who would have thought that Austria would have been so touchy about Nazi propaganda and rabble-rousing? I mean, I wonder what historical reason they could have for having such laws?” The fact that Hitler was Austrian?
“People who deny the mistreatment of Germans by the Russians after WWII insult me” Nobody deny it. The debate is about who started? Who can expect the Russian soldiers, after Minsk, Kiev and thousands of villages burned, family killed, tortured, deported, not to take revenge on their unsuccessful aggressor? It is very easy to say now they shouldn’t but they lost really a lot of people…
Now, I want to be clear. I am not in favour of jail for Irving. What he said was insulting and absurd. Everybody with eyes travelling in Europe can still see the reality of Nazism. I also think the law against the denial is stupid and counter productive. It gives to the negationists to much audience.
-
Re: Should David Irving go to jail for holocaust denial?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slyspy
It is part of their penence, part of the debt they and every country which surrendered its Jews must pay in some form. Who else should be the guardians of the Holocaust's horrors than those who were involved? A fitting task I think.
You do realise that most of the people in power in Germany and other countries were at the most teenagers? There is no such thing as hereditory guilt, you are not responsible for the actions of your ancestors and you have no obligation to make up for them any more than any one else.
The British are no longer in any way responsible for slavery and in another 20-30s America will no longer be responsible for black/white segregation.
Irving should not be in prison because then he has no freedom of speech. What if one day saying the Holocaust happened is made against the law? You can't have laws like this; purely as a matter of principle.