Freedom of speech?

by The Rebel 43 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • freemindfade
    freemindfade
    Freedom of speech is never absolute, but at what point do you think it reasonable and justified?

    Its reasonable as long as others are allowed to criticize the speech of the other exercising their freedom.

    Cult like JWS and Islam demand freedom of religion/speech, but prohibit from others.

    Idiotic things like JW indoctrination cartoons and KKK hate demonstrations are allowed but the majority are allowed to tell them they are f--cking idiots. This freedom, and the freedom to criticize should keep things in check, once that is lost one extreme will take over.

    Freedom of speech is only dangerous when it becomes one sided, when you are the good extremism as long as you are the right kind of extreme.

    Freedom of speech HAS to be absolute to work. So a few crack pots can say whatever they want as long as they can be challenged not silenced.

  • Simon
    Simon

    Maybe the headmaster wants to speak to you about your atrocious spelling ...

    Seriously, the book represents more than one persons experiences. It's about the whole nazi reign and what they did to people. There are those that want to deny lots of it even happened and anything that hints at such things should be slapped down IMO.

    I don't believe in absolute freedom of speech. Some things should not be allowed. The type of speech that the constitution referred to is political expression, ironically one of the least protected / respected things. Instead it's been taken over by lawyers to make a buck and every crackpot and hate-group to sprew their vile nonsense.

  • freddo
    freddo

    David Irving is completely discredited.

    An English court ruling - where he sued Deborah Lipstadt for (in her book Denying the Holocaust) calling him a Holocaust denier was that "he is an active Holocaust denier ... anti-Semitic and racist ... he associates with right wing extremists who promote neo-Nazism."

    The Appeal Lord Justices refused him leave to appeal and he was bankrupted over costs.

    Funnily enough after being arrested in Austria he changed his tune and admitted that "The Nazis did murder millions of Jews..."

    He still got sentenced to imprisonment mind ...

  • freddo
    freddo

    "Evidently" eh, Ben131895? Where have I heard that before?

    Google "Anne Frank ballpoint pen myth".

  • Giordano
    Giordano

    I just finished a brief search about Ann Frank and have concluded that there is more then enough evidence that Ann Frank started her diary at age 13 and over the next few years she went back and edited her diary, condensing parts of it and rewriting other parts. There are three diaries, the last one unfinished.

    Her father, the only survivor of the family edited her diaries with an eye to having them published.

    Long story short: In 1959, Anne Frank’s manuscripts were studied by graphologists (handwriting experts) in Germany, as part of the preparations for a legal action that was brought by Otto Frank. In March 1960, the Hamburg graphologists came to the conclusion in their 131-page report that all the notations in the diaries and the loose sheets, and all the corrections and additions, were ‘identical’ with Anne’s handwriting. The report also concluded that the loose sheets were not written before the three diary books. Finally, the conclusion was made that ‘‘(...) the text published in German translation as Das Tagebuch der Anne Frank may be considered true to its sources in substance and ideas."

    The most extensive investigation was carried out in the first half of the 1980’s by the Netherlands Forensic Institute at the request of the National Institute for War Documentation. The results of this research were presented in a report of over 250 pages. The main section of the report is taken up with the findings of a detailed handwriting comparison, but a forensic document analysis was also carried out....................

    the report of the Netherlands Forensic Institute has convincingly demonstrated that both versions of the diary of Anne Frank were written by her in the years 1942 to 1944. The allegations that the diary was the work of someone else (...) are thus conclusively refuted."



    The origin of the "ballpoint myth" is the four-page report that the Federal Criminal Police Office (the Bundeskriminalamt or BKA) in Wiesbaden, which was published in 1980. In this investigation into the types of paper and ink used in the diary of Anne Frank it is stated that "ballpoint corrections" had been made on some loose sheets. A Mr Ockelmann from Hamburg wrote that his mother had written the annotation sheets in question. Mrs Ockelmann was a member of the team that carried out the graphological investigation into the writings of Anne Frank around 1960.

    http://www.annefrank.org/ImageVaultFiles/id_14671/cf_21/tenquestions_en.PDF

  • cofty
    cofty
    This is why words should never be banned, and opinions allowed to be spoken. If you ban words you ban " Freedom of speech". However words should be exposed, held up to the light and questioned. But never banned.

    I agree.

    Your errors about the diaries, and Ben's ignorant comments about David Irving have both been refuted with facts in an open forum.

    Don't ban speech we disagree with. Let it be said publicly and then let it be destroyed with evidence.

    Free speech works.

  • The Rebel
    The Rebel

    Giordano thanks for your post.

    In my opinion we can do a brief search on the Internet about the diary and come up with evidence either way. I think the challenge is to read the book with critical thinking skills and come to our own conclusion. I say this because none of your points in defense of the diary would I challenge, but I do challenge the diary based on Annes comments, about the need to be so silent, that they couldn't even cough at night, and yet they have constant noisy quarrels, use daily a noisy vacuuming cleaner, chop wood and have smoke come out the chimney at night. This and many other points make me using my independent thinking question how much of the diary was written by Anne Frank.

    Anyway under copywriter law " The Diary of Anne Frank" should have became under the public domain in January 2016. Oh I say should, it's now considered that Otto Frank is an editor. Well that makes a bizarre argument, surely editing a book,especially a personal diary, shouldn't effect the authorship. Not unless it was co-written in my opinion.

    The Rebel.

    p.s Simon I apologise for my atrousious spelling and thanks for bringing the matter to my attention.

  • freddo
    freddo

    "atrousious" spelling.

    LOL.

  • The Rebel
    The Rebel

    Cofty please clarify my errors about the diary. I also disdain my comments being associated with David Irving.

    Cofty, Rather than ban speech we disagree with, we should educate ourselves. Let me therefore publically ask you, would you and your family have hidden in " the secret annex" whilst a noisy 1940s vacuume cleaner was being used each morning, and whilst wood was being chopped with an axe, and smoke coming from the chimney of your hiding place?  I certainly wouldn't, and all this in the first few pages of a diary, that began stating the need to remain silent.

    I think many people can comment on the " Diary" but the evidence should be based on having read it. Have you read the " diary" Cofty? That is where the evidence is not Davd Irwing.

    The Rebel.

  • cofty
    cofty

    Rebel - My point was that people should be allowed to say things that we disagree with. Somebody raise the argument about the ballpoint pen. It was then refuted with evidence.

    As for the noise issue I have no knowledge or opinion.

    I don't think this thread will be interesting if it becomes a debate about the authenticity of Anne Frank's diaries. That is just an example of the more important matter of your freedom to voice your thoughts.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit