Holocaust denier deported (page 3)

Athanasius

Whether you agree or disagree with someone's opinions, once you begin suppressing freedom of speech, where does it stop? The laws that you use to suppress others can some day be used to suppress you.

Sounds like this issue means a lot to you. Have you written your Governor or the appropriate counterpart to question how the hate laws contradict the Freedom of Speech amendment? What do you think it would take to change these laws?

avishai

Oooh, touchy subject for me. I had a girlfriend who was murdered by neo-nazi skinheads. She had been one, was no longer one, so they wrapped her in barbed wire and kicked her to death. I agree with most of Abbadon's post. And trust me, him and I get into it a lot ( Though with tremendous respect, mutual, I think., I think he's one of the smartest poster's on this board).

Where do you stop, though? Yes, Ernst Zundel is a DICK!! BUT!! Does Germany have ties to Saudi Arabia? Canada Does, The US does. Saudi textbooks state that Jews are at the root of all the major world problems. The Saudi tourism minister said jews were'nt welcome in Saudi arabia (this was later retracted, but,,,,,) Where do you draw the line? Ernst Zundel is a kook. We have entier governments that we deal with, nicely, on a day to day basis that have stated blatantly that the jews need to be wiped off the earth, that have far larger resources than the Nazi's ever had, and if they could would gladly kill every jew in the world, where anti-jewish hatred is far more widespread and taught than it ever was in 1930'a europe. What do ya do?

Athanasius

Unfortunately I have never visited Mauritius, so I don't know what it is like to live in your country, tailsin. Do you have free elections with multiparty participation or is it a one party state? From what I gather from your posts your country lacks many of the freedoms that we Americans take for granted. Nevertheless, I hope that you have found a measure of freedom now that you are out of the Watch Tower. Best wishes.

avishai

bttt

Abaddon

avishai

The respect is mutual, don't worry... you don't have to agree with me all the time to get respected... ;-)

Ernst Zundel is a DICK!! BUT!! Does Germany have ties to Saudi Arabia? Canada Does, The US does. Saudi textbooks state that Jews are at the root of all the major world problems. The Saudi tourism minister said jews weren't welcome in Saudi arabia (this was later retracted, but,,,,,)

Obviously I will agree that it is a bunch of hypocritical bollocks that some democratic countries will not force upon a convenient ally the same level of human rights they insist upon elsewhere.

However, the fact that politicians almost always either are or end up being hypocrites doesn't change my feelings about Zundel. He took choices that ended him up where he is, he should take responsibility for his choices.

Hell, I think drugs should be legalised, and that is is not right to even ban them on grounds of human rights, but would concede it was my fault if me ignoring the law got me into jail; why can't fascist apologists and supporters take the same responsibility?

One might think the speed limit is dumb, but whose fault is it if you get busted? YOURS.

Athansius

Whether you agree or disagree with someone's opinions, once you begin suppressing freedom of speech, where does it stop? The laws that you use to suppress others can some day be used to suppress you.

So what do you do when the expression of certain peoples opinions makes other people fear their safety or freedom? Neo-Nazis, Nazi apologists and their ilk, by their very expression of opinion, makes others fear for their safety.

I think the right to freedom of fear is more important than allowing people to misuse the freedom of speech to intimidate and frighten others.

That is what revisionism and Nazi apologetics does.

People should be allowed to say what they like provided what they say does not reasonably lead other people to live in fear.

I actually think Zundel's plight is hilarious.

Poor ickle nazi apologist, awwww, poor little revisonist... hahahahaha! As you reap so shall you sow, motherferker...

Would we feel sorry for a man who advocated sex with children being imprisoned, if such advocation leads others to live in fear? If he was quoted by and was a 'poster boy' of pedophiles who carried out violent assaults upon children, his words would reasonably lead to fear in children and parent of children.

I don't think we'd shed a tear for such a person being imprisoned because of his words; let's shed none for Zundel. He is quoted by and is a poster boy for Nazi apologists and revisionists, including members of violent far-right movements. He cannot claim to not share in their crimes of violence, any more than a person who claimed sex with children was right could claim that someone reading their words and acting on them was nothing to do with them.

Those who do not seek or cause harm to innocent parties through their speech should have freedom of speech. Inciters of hate should not. It is that simple.

talesin

And I repeat the ignored question:

Sounds like this issue means a lot to you. Have you written your Governor or the appropriate counterpart to question how the hate laws contradict the Freedom of Speech amendment? What do you think it would take to change these laws?

Am I to assume that you either do not really believe in complete freedom of speech, or that you have taken no action to protest the unfair laws in your country that prohibit hate speech?

Does this mean you are with the ACLU and stand behind their support of NAMBLA?

You have taken a very strong stance on this issue, ie "all speech should be free". So, what gives?

And no, I am happy to be a Canadian. I just changed my country symbol when there was a witchhunt being made by some psychos on JWO, tracing Canadians' IPs.

So you don't need to speak condescendingly to me about rights and freedoms. :D

t

Country Girl

I know I'll get flamed for this big time, but:

Although I do not support the political aims of NAMBLA *or* Zundel, I do believe that people have the right to say whatever they please, we have the right *not to listen* and to use our God-given brains to research and come to our own conclusions with regards to these types of nutters' statements. When people are incited to violence against a particular group of people because of believing these crazies' statements and such, who pays the price? The nutter, or the perpetrator? Everyone is accountable for their own behavior. Words are just words. When harmful action is taken against another human, then it should be dealt with.

I do not believe that if you kill a gay person, that it should be considered a hate crime any more than you would if a white male were killed. Murder stems from hate, therefore any murder is the result of a hate crime. I think this is a prime example of reverse discrimination.

Just my humble two cents' worth.

CG

Abaddon

Country Girl

Indeed, everyone is accountable for their own behaviour.

Someone who plants lies and misconceptions about Jews that cause others to act violently against Jews is accountable for the incitement.

If I ask someone to steal for me, and they do, I have a degree of responsibility. If I say stealing is great and right and proper, and someone who reads this steals, I must also have a degree of responsibility despite the lack of specificity in my statements.

I cannot feel that giving some people the 'right' to terrorise others through their words is right.

Words are just words? Yup, 'all Jews must die' are indeed just words. Just like 'kill the niggers' or 'children like sex with adults' are just words. If words did not have the power to influence and instigate actions, politicians wouldn't give speeches, love letters would never be written, and Hitler would have painted houses. Shakespeare would be the action of holding a long piece of wood with a metal tip and waving it around. Words can inspire love and hate. They can cause Nations to rise and fall. The pen is indeed mightier than the sword, but words don't even need paper or metal to kill, so are mightier still. We were all trapped in a cult because of words, and escaped from a cult because of words.

I do not believe that if you kill a gay person, that it should be considered a hate crime any more than you would if a white male were killed. Murder stems from hate, therefore any murder is the result of a hate crime. I think this is a prime example of reverse discrimination.

If someone specifically targeted white heterosexual males to kill on grounds they were 'bad' in someway, their crime would be judged more serious than someone killing someone who HAPPENED to be a white heterosexual male. It would be baseless and pre-meditated, a cause in itself. It would have nothing to do with the persons actions in any logical way, it would be purely on grounds of an ideological hate. A heavier sentence would almost always result. So whilst killing normally involves hate, there is not a level playing field, it is not black and white... ... and you don't say why saying things that makes others live in fear should be an inviolable right. Freedom of speech is tied up in the concept of 'all humans' being equal, and entitled to 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness'. How can one freedom be allowed to run without any limit when it denies others equally important freedoms? See? No flames, just criticism of your argument. 8-)

talesin

CG

I'm not gonna flame ya!!! (squeezes)

My point was to "Athanasius" (can't remember the exact name) who was saying that all laws against hate crimes are wrong.

Since the US has laws against hate speech, I was merely asking him to tell me if he actively protests said laws, and if, as a supporter of free speech NEVER being compromised, does he support the ACLU's defense of NAMBLA. (bats eyes innocently)

My purpose was to point out the black-and-white thinking.

I mean if ALL speech should be free, that includes the NAMBLA's, right?

t

(edited to correct spelling)

Holocaust denier deported

Share this