• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged General Holocaust denial discussion Part IV

Parsman said:
Again it needs stating to people like you "Free Speech" does not mean "Freedom from Consequences of Speech".
Click to expand...

But it does mean "Freedom from LEGAL Consequences of Speech".

Even in the USA you can't go shouting "Fire" in a crowded movie theatre when there is no fire.
Click to expand...

I hate that example; that's not 'speech', it's not publishing an opinion on something. It wouldn't be illegal to post a blog saying that you thought there was a fire in a crowded theatre three weeks ago. The clear intent was to cause physical danger through a panicking crowd; shouting 'fire' in a crowded theatre is essentially incitement to violence.

But if you are foolish enough to publish views calling for violence or bigotry in public fora you face the possibility of prosecution because there are laws against that kind of thing.
Click to expand...

Has she called for violence? Genuine question; I've only ever seen literally five seconds of one of her videos in a clip someone else used.

Again she has a right to think that way but if she puts it in the public sphere she can be challenged on it.
Click to expand...

Of course, but 'being challenged' =/= 'being prosecuted'.
 
Parsman said:
Again it needs stating to people like you "Free Speech" does not mean "Freedom from Consequences of Speech". Even in the USA you can't go shouting "Fire" in a crowded movie theatre when there is no fire. You can think what you like in the UK. You can say what you like to family, friends and like minded individuals. But if you are foolish enough to publish views calling for violence or bigotry in public fora you face the possibility of prosecution because there are laws against that kind of thing. Reading her statements in the article you linked to it is clear she is Anti Jewish and believes all the ridiculous tropes that have been propagated in Europe for more than a thousand years. She isn't presenting historical evidence in a way which can be evaluated and add to our knowledge of events, she is just being bigoted, anti-Jewish and inflammatory. Again she has a right to think that way but if she puts it in the public sphere she can be challenged on it. That is what happened and seeing her odious take on what happened to the Jews between 1933 - 1945 (as well as gays, socialists, Roma, the mentally impaired and resistance groups like the White Rose) it seems that she received a correct judgement in a UK Court of Law.
Click to expand...
Is it illegal to deny the Armenian genocide, Rwanda Genocide, Cambodian genocide?
 
Georgio said:
Has she called for violence? Genuine question; I've only ever seen literally five seconds of one of her videos in a clip someone else used.
Click to expand...
I've never seen the video but I already know the answer. No.

It's how she worded it was the giveaway. Slyly throwing in advocating violence with "bigotry."
 
Parsman said:
Again it needs stating to people like you "Free Speech" does not mean "Freedom from Consequences of Speech". Even in the USA you can't go shouting "Fire" in a crowded movie theatre when there is no fire.
Click to expand...
Not exactly the same thing.

You can think what you like in the UK. You can say what you like to family, friends and like minded individuals. But if you are foolish enough to publish views calling for violence or bigotry in public fora you face the possibility of prosecution because there are laws against that kind of thing.
Click to expand...
Calls for violence are not the same as calls for bigotry. Questioning a historical narrative isn't the same as calls for violence or calls for bigotry. You shouldn't face the possibility of prosecution for expressing an unpopular view of WW2 history. No exceptions to freedom of speech apply here.

Reading her statements in the article you linked to it is clear she is Anti Jewish and believes all the ridiculous tropes that have been propagated in Europe for more than a thousand years. She isn't presenting historical evidence in a way which can be evaluated and add to our knowledge of events, she is just being bigoted, anti-Jewish and inflammatory. Again she has a right to think that way but if she puts it in the public sphere she can be challenged on it.
Click to expand...

Challenged on it is what should happen. Prosecuted for expressing it should not.

That is what happened and seeing her odious take on what happened to the Jews between 1933 - 1945 (as well as gays, socialists, Roma, the mentally impaired and resistance groups like the White Rose) it seems that she received a correct judgement in a UK Court of Law.
Click to expand...
There was once a country in Europe where expressing dissident viewpoints was strongly discouraged. People who did so were concentrated in specially built camps so the governement could keep an eye on them. I can't remember the name of the country but it was next to France. But anyway, that sounds like a place you might like living.
 
CaptainHowdy said:
There was once a country in Europe where expressing dissident viewpoints was strongly discouraged. People who did so were concentrated in specially built camps so the governement could keep an eye on them. I can't remember the name of the country but it was next to France. But anyway, that sounds like a place you might like living.
Click to expand...

I really didn't think it would be possible to Godwin this thread.
 
Hi there

Question on Quora I saw the following claim:

""In short: Bulgaria even initially an ally of Nazis, saved all Jewish people.""

https://www.quora.com/What-were-Bulgarias-biggest-military-contributions-to-WWII

Is that correct?

I found at this website:https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/bulgaria

This seems more authoritative



During the war, German-allied Bulgaria did not deport Jews from the core provinces of Bulgaria. The Bulgarian authorities did, however, deport Jewish residents from Greek and Yugoslav territories that Bulgaria had occupied in 1941. In March 1943, Bulgarian police and military units rounded up all the Jews in Macedonia, Thrace, and Pirot. Bulgarian officials interned 7,000 Macedonian Jews in a transit camp in Skopje. In Greek Thrace, Bulgarian officials deported about 4,000 Jews to assembly points at Gorna Dzhumaya and Dupnitsa and then handed them over to the Germans. In all, Bulgaria deported over 11,000 Jews to German-held territory. By the end of March 1943, virtually all of them died in the Treblinka killing center in German-occupied Poland.
Click to expand...
 
Parsman said:
Again it needs stating to people like you "Free Speech" does not mean "Freedom from Consequences of Speech". Even in the USA you can't go shouting "Fire" in a crowded movie theatre when there is no fire. You can think what you like in the UK. You can say what you like to family, friends and like minded individuals. But if you are foolish enough to publish views calling for violence or bigotry in public fora you face the possibility of prosecution because there are laws against that kind of thing. Reading her statements in the article you linked to it is clear she is Anti Jewish and believes all the ridiculous tropes that have been propagated in Europe for more than a thousand years. She isn't presenting historical evidence in a way which can be evaluated and add to our knowledge of events, she is just being bigoted, anti-Jewish and inflammatory. Again she has a right to think that way but if she puts it in the public sphere she can be challenged on it. That is what happened and seeing her odious take on what happened to the Jews between 1933 - 1945 (as well as gays, socialists, Roma, the mentally impaired and resistance groups like the White Rose) it seems that she received a correct judgement in a UK Court of Law.
Click to expand...

In the US, even bigotry is protected speech...unless it's coupled with an open call for violence.
 
CaptainHowdy said:
There was once a country in Europe where expressing dissident viewpoints was strongly discouraged. People who did so were concentrated in specially built camps so the governement could keep an eye on them. I can't remember the name of the country but it was next to France. But anyway, that sounds like a place you might like living.
Click to expand...

Likening what happened to this waste of space to the Nazi attack on free speech is amusing. It isn't by a long shot. I do in fact oppose laws that criminalize Holocaust denial for various reasons. One of them being is that if you want to guard your right to express your opinion without governmental suppression, the price of that is speech you despise must be allowed.

Of course it is very easy to find out that people like this person do not really support free speech, they just use it in order to spread their vile nonsense. I have little doubt that if they got the whip hand guess what would happen!

Knowing something about the actual suppression of speech in Nazi Germany modern states including those with anti - Holocaust denial laws, are remarkably ineffective, by comparison, in suppressing such hate speech and the number of prosecutions etc., is very small. And of course the Police aren't routinely raiding premises for illegal printing operations, neither are they engaged in mass preventive censorship. In fact anti- Holocaust denial laws have proved remarkably ineffective has such material is very easy to find.

And of course one of the effects of such laws is that when someone is charged they can maneuver themselves to become a martyr to free speech, thus handling these wastes of space a propaganda victory. So in my opinion those laws are not just ineffective but a waste of time.

And of course so many of these idiots make the mistake of deliberately conflating criticism with suppression of their speech.

In my opinion these people should be under public scrutiny and subject to public ridicule for their murderous idiocy. I have little doubt that if they were in power a reign of terror would ensue. TH price of freedom is vigilance. And the price of freedom is that people abuse it.

In Canada we have anti-hate speech laws and they are ineffective to a truly amazing degree. I can easily go into a Evangelical Christian Book Store and find vicious, hateful anti-Gay crap. I can go into a Mosque and find Anti-Semitic drivel of a truly repellant variety and so on and so forth.

If countries like Canada are trying to supress speech the way Nazi Germany did they are doing a truly lousy job of it. And that is a good thing.
 
The biggest problem I have with Anti Hate Speech laws is who decides what is hate speech and what is not?
I am betting that some opinions on Christinaity expressed in the relgion section here could easily be classified as "Hate Speech".
It always comes down in restricing speech to "Who Will Watch The Watchers"?
 
dudalb said:
The biggest problem I have with Anti Hate Speech laws is who decides what is hate speech and what is not?
I am betting that some opinions on Christinaity expressed in the relgion section here could easily be classified as "Hate Speech".
It always comes down in restricing speech to "Who Will Watch The Watchers"?
Click to expand...

+1 It's a cliche but a true one that 'if you advocate stopping people saying what you think is false it won't be long before you're stopped from saying what you think is true'.
 
Hans said:
Hi there

Question on Quora I saw the following claim:

""In short: Bulgaria even initially an ally of Nazis, saved all Jewish people.""

https://www.quora.com/What-were-Bulgarias-biggest-military-contributions-to-WWII

Is that correct?

I found at this website:https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/bulgaria

This seems more authoritative
Click to expand...
The USHMM quotation is right on this, the Quora post not so much, as it confuses a decision in 1943 with the whole of Bulgaria's wartime policy and different groups of Jews under Bulgaria's controls.

Frederic Chary, The Bulgarian Jews and the Final Solution, 1940-1944 is an older title that gives a decent overview; in territories which Bulgaria occupied (e.g., Yugoslavia and Greece), Bulgaria cooperated in the Final Solution, very brutally and effectively. Studies of the Balkans during the war, as well as studies of Treblinka, have details on the fate of Jews under Bulgaria's control in occupied Thrace and Macdonia. Chary's book is good for how the Jews who lived in the core provinces of Bulgaria were treated and how the decision was made in 1943 not to include them in the Final Solution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom