Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Eldorado

Holocaust Denial not protected by Rights

43 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Eldorado

"Settling a years-long dispute, the European Court of Human Rights ruled Thursday that denying the Holocaust happened is not protected expression under Europe’s human rights convention.

"A seven-judge panel found that far-right German politician Udo Pastörs had “intentionally stated untruths in order to defame the Jews and the persecution that they had suffered during the Second World War.”"

Full monty at CourtHouseNews dot com: https://www.courthousenews.com/eu-court-rules-holocaust-denial-not-protected-by-rights-law/

 

"Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights protects the right to free expression. It means we can have our own opinions and share them with others.

"It applies even if our views might upset or offend people.

"However, the right to say whatever we want can be restricted in certain circumstances – to prevent crime, for example, or to protect the rights or reputation of others. “The exercise of these freedoms…carries with it duties and responsibilities”, Article 10 states."

And at RightsInfo dot org: https://rightsinfo.org/freedom-speech-holocaust-denial-echr/

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
6 minutes ago, Eldorado said:

"However, the right to say whatever we want can be restricted in certain circumstances – to prevent crime, for example, or to protect the rights or reputation of others. “The exercise of these freedoms…carries with it duties and responsibilities”, Article 10 states."

And at RightsInfo dot org: https://rightsinfo.org/freedom-speech-holocaust-denial-echr/

Ah yesss... the Muslima exception.  Freedom of Speech, anyone?

 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RabidMongoose
8 minutes ago, Eldorado said:

"Settling a years-long dispute, the European Court of Human Rights ruled Thursday that denying the Holocaust happened is not protected expression under Europe’s human rights convention.

"A seven-judge panel found that far-right German politician Udo Pastörs had “intentionally stated untruths in order to defame the Jews and the persecution that they had suffered during the Second World War.”"

Full monty at CourtHouseNews dot com: https://www.courthousenews.com/eu-court-rules-holocaust-denial-not-protected-by-rights-law/

 

"Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights protects the right to free expression. It means we can have our own opinions and share them with others.

"It applies even if our views might upset or offend people.

"However, the right to say whatever we want can be restricted in certain circumstances – to prevent crime, for example, or to protect the rights or reputation of others. “The exercise of these freedoms…carries with it duties and responsibilities”, Article 10 states."

And at RightsInfo dot org: https://rightsinfo.org/freedom-speech-holocaust-denial-echr/

I`m going to defend the guys right to free speech even though what he said is offensive to millions.

Everyone should be able to say their piece in a Democracy and be allowed a platform to speak it from. Its for everyone else to then decide if they agree or disagree with them. It isn't for the state to pre-approve or officially endorse what views people are allowed to express. That is except for incitement of violence.

In a mature Democracy everything, no matter how abhorrent, should be heard.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dark_Grey
Quote

"However, the right to say whatever we want can be restricted in certain circumstances – to prevent crime, for example, or to protect the rights or reputation of others. “The exercise of these freedoms…carries with it duties and responsibilities”, Article 10 states."

Freedom of speech: squashed. Praise be to the Democratically elected European Court of Human Rights

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aaron2016

"to protect the rights or reputation of others."

Does that mean it is unlawful to criticize politicians when they do a bad job?

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener

Would YOU trust government to mandate what you are - and are not - allowed to say ? 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scholar4Truth

If someone wants to deny the holocaust they have that right regardless of how stupid their claims.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
13 minutes ago, Scholar4Truth said:

If someone wants to deny the holocaust they have that right regardless of how stupid their claims.

Nope. You will be carted in front of a judge, accused of "Hate Speech", and given the sort of prison sentence previously reserved for dangerous muggers and murderers. 

Because you are NOT allowed to think certain thoughts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aaron2016
Posted (edited)
52 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Nope. You will be carted in front of a judge, accused of "Hate Speech", and given the sort of prison sentence previously reserved for dangerous muggers and murderers. 

Because you are NOT allowed to think certain thoughts. 

Can't even debate the subject. Youtube members were removed because they debated the accuracy of the 6 million figure.  I heard that it is now a criminal offence in Germany to even discuss it.  It's perhaps the most poorly researched subject in history and protected against any kind of scrutiny.  Can't blame people for refusing to believe a subject that is not open to scrutiny or revision.  It just pushes people further away.

 

Knowledge is power.  It grows, corrects, and adapts.  Yet on this subject it is silenced, removed, and criminalized.

 

Freedom of Information?

Discussing the Holocaust - Removed.  <_<

holoc1.png

 

 

Edited by Aaron2016
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek

i don't like this one bit, and i'm a jew.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
Posted (edited)

It's madness. Worse, it is bordering on fascism. 

Speech should be free. If somebody propagates libel, then let the courts deal with it under the libel laws. 

If somebody propagates "hate".. then.. oh dear.. we're in trouble straight away. Who defines what is hate ? 

There are existing laws to deal with rabble-rousing. I believe they are called "incitement" or somesuch, and even THEY are dodgy. 

The various "hate speech" laws are highly regressive, and should be struck down. 

They have no place in a liberal society. 

Edited by RoofGardener
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Caspian Hare

Every historical event should be open to questioning and debate. Otherwise you're not dealing with history, you're handing down the truth like dogma. :hmm:

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek
2 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

It's madness. Worse, it is bordering on fascism. 

Speech should be free. If somebody propagates libel, then let the courts deal with it under the libel laws. 

If somebody propagates "hate".. then.. oh dear.. we're in trouble straight away. Who defines what is hate ? 

There are existing laws to deal with rabble-rousing. I believe they are called "incitement" or somesuch, and even THEY are dodgy. 

The various "hate speech" laws are highly regressive, and should be struck down. 

They have no place in a liberal society. 

you nailed it, that is exactly why we have selective freedom of speech, cuz it is a liberal society

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quiXilver

If one has the power of speech, one is free to say anything they wish... anytime they like.

One however, is never free from the consequences of speaking.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peter B
On 10/6/2019 at 8:09 AM, Aaron2016 said:

Can't even debate the subject. Youtube members were removed because they debated the accuracy of the 6 million figure.  I heard that it is now a criminal offence in Germany to even discuss it.  It's perhaps the most poorly researched subject in history and protected against any kind of scrutiny.  Can't blame people for refusing to believe a subject that is not open to scrutiny or revision.  It just pushes people further away.

 

Knowledge is power.  It grows, corrects, and adapts.  Yet on this subject it is silenced, removed, and criminalized.

 

Freedom of Information?

Discussing the Holocaust - Removed.  <_<

holoc1.png

 

 

Would you care to provide some evidence to back up this statement?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aaron2016
2 hours ago, Peter B said:

Would you care to provide some evidence to back up this statement?

That's the point.  Every time the evidence is provided it is swiftly removed.  I tried to search for half a dozen familiar videos on Youtube and they have all been removed.  Apparently it is offensive to discuss in depth the accuracy of the holocaust death toll number because it is regarded as Holocaust denial.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_against_Holocaust_denial

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peter B
19 minutes ago, Aaron2016 said:

That's the point.  Every time the evidence is provided it is swiftly removed.  I tried to search for half a dozen familiar videos on Youtube and they have all been removed.  Apparently it is offensive to discuss in depth the accuracy of the holocaust death toll number because it is regarded as Holocaust denial.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_against_Holocaust_denial

 

 

Sorry, but could you please clarify to what thing or event you are applying the statement "...perhaps the most poorly researched subject in history..."?

Are you applying that statement to the Holocaust itself, or to something else?

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tortugabob

The six million number goes well back before World War 2  (two). Zionists factions in the United States were claiming six million Jews were going to perish during and immediately after World War 1 (one). Google it (if the references haven't been deleted). They were seeking funds to buy land in Palestine and colonize it with Jewish settlers. The six million number comes from the Kabbalah. It's a Kabbalistic numerological interpretation of Leviticus, chapter 25, verse 10, which you'll find in the Torah.  It was interpreted to mean that six million righteous Jews must be killed before the modern state of Israel could be brought to fruition.  After WW2 the Zionists had their justification.  Or so they say. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aaron2016
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, tortugabob said:

The six million number goes well back before World War 2  (two). Zionists factions in the United States were claiming six million Jews were going to perish during and immediately after World War 1 (one). Google it (if the references haven't been deleted). They were seeking funds to buy land in Palestine and colonize it with Jewish settlers. The six million number comes from the Kabbalah. It's a Kabbalistic numerological interpretation of Leviticus, chapter 25, verse 10, which you'll find in the Torah.  It was interpreted to mean that six million righteous Jews must be killed before the modern state of Israel could be brought to fruition.  After WW2 the Zionists had their justification.  Or so they say. 

 

 

 

 

It is a subject that is clouded in mystery and fear of offending.  At least 200 claims were made between 1900 - 1945.  Yet nobody scratches their head and thinks something is fishy?  No official Inquiry?

 

6million.png

 

 

Edited by Aaron2016
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Essan
On 10/4/2019 at 8:52 PM, RabidMongoose said:

In a mature Democracy everything, no matter how abhorrent, should be heard.

 

If ever we reach maturity, maybe that will be the case.  But it's a very long way off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then

While we are having a KumBaya moment about holocaust deniers and how important it is to protect them, care to discuss the treatment people in the EU receive when they insult the Prophet?  I'd say you guys are straining at a gnat while swallowing camels...but that's just me...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peter B
1 hour ago, Aaron2016 said:

It is a subject that is clouded in mystery and fear of offending.  At least 200 claims were made between 1900 - 1945.  Yet nobody scratches their head and thinks something is fishy?  No official Inquiry?

 

6million.png

 

 

Could you please answer my question in post #17?

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aaron2016
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Peter B said:

Could you please answer my question in post #17?

Thank you.

It is a subject which has every question deflected back against the person asking it.  Any other subject would be welcomed to full scrutiny.  The subject of the holocaust is not allowed to be scrutinized - hence the objecting many people have (including historians) who are not allowed to analyse in depth the claims that were made, which understandably frustrates many.  I recall one debate which referred to the infamous Nazi Doctor who (according to holocaust survivors) was seen at two different camps at the same time and they were hundreds of miles apart, or the swimming pool which one survivor said 5,000+ people were drowned in daily, while another said it was used only for recreational purposes by the soldiers, or the fact that millions were dying from Typhus and the numbers killed at the camps by the disease was never fully examined, or the survivors who said the people were burned in ovens and they saw black smoke pouring out of tall chimneys, but the amount of coal needed was not available, and burning bodies requires a temperature so hot that black smoke is not emitted, and then we have survivors who said they had a good time at the camps with grand pianos, concerts, camp shops and currency, picking flowers in the fields and making cups of tea for everyone.  All of these claims good and bad need to be examined, and scrutinized.  Otherwise we are left with photographs of the aftermath, rumours and claims that contradict each other, and wild assumptions and speculations to fill in the blanks.

On one side we are left with documentaries and books that apparently can't be scrutinized, and on the other side we have senior figures in the community telling us not to believe the official story. e.g.

 

Bishop Williamson

 

 

The subject should be fully open to debate without fear of offending, because the truth (the whole truth) is all anyone wants.

 

 

Edited by Aaron2016

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Caspian Hare
8 hours ago, Aaron2016 said:

It is a subject that is clouded in mystery and fear of offending.  At least 200 claims were made between 1900 - 1945.  Yet nobody scratches their head and thinks something is fishy?  No official Inquiry?

 

6million.png

 

 

 

I mean I have heard about this before but always through denier sources because I guess nobody else will touch the subject. Another reason not to push a subject out of the realm of polite debate.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.