Should We Arrest Those who Claim the Holocaust Never Happened?

[FinnMacCool]

Well? Your answer?

 

[FinnMacCool]

I believe that we should defend people's freedom of speech no matter what. Putting up with other people's bullshit is one of the inevitable consequences of having freedom of speech. So yes, I believe we should defend those who deny the holocaust existed, if thats what they truly believe.

 

[Navy Pride]

Why would we arrest them? They are breaking no law........

 

[FinnMacCool]

Okay supposing we had a law then. I was just speculating.

 

[Navy Pride]

Okay supposing we had a law then. I was just speculating.

We wouldn't..........

 

[DeeJayH]

Well? Your answer?

:roll: arrest people for no crime commited?
what are you now, an Islamic fanatic

 

[FinnMacCool]

Wow you guys are horrible at playing make believe

 

[earthworm]

There are nations(Japan for one) and groups of people who are delusional, as they are not completely/openly educated..
But this is not a crime,IMO..
At all times the truth must be known by all people on this planet - this would be ideal and even occurs in sometimes and in some places(the good ole USA)....

 

[The Real McCoy]

Guys like Noam Chomsky claim other mass genocides never happened. However stupid they are, they're protected by the 1st amendment.

 

[black wolf]

In Germany, it is forbidden by law to publicly deny the holocaust happened (Volksverhetzung, roughly "incitement of the masses"). Is that immoral? In light of our history, we know that these people more often serve an agenda of disinformation of the public, than merely protecting personal beliefs. Every disinformant will find followers, who will refuse to be educated. If the world was good, we could educate these people by presenting facts and rational arguments. But human nature is not such. Stupidity is contagious. Sometimes we must have laws protecting humans from their own fallible nature. In this case, outspoken denial of historical facts is not an opinion, it is a danger. If such laws are deemed unconstitutional in the US, so be it. All I can say is that Germany today has one of the lowest rates of racially motivated hate crime in Europe, including the former socialist states.

 

[FinnMacCool]

Guys like Noam Chomsky claim other mass genocides never happened. However stupid they are, they're protected by the 1st amendment

That's been floating around the internet for years. It's absolute bullshit. I actually listened to the audio of that interview and it's not at all like right wingers make it out to be. He is one of the greatest leftist thinkers of our time so, of course, people will jump on the opportunity to sieze something to criticize him for. Of course, they've only gotten one on him. If you had more, you would probably have a more compelling argument.

BTw, if you want you should start an anti Chomsky thread. I realize that this was a shot at me but it would be nice if you could do it elsewhere.

 

[FinnMacCool]

In Germany, it is forbidden by law to publicly deny the holocaust happened (Volksverhetzung, roughly "incitement of the masses"). Is that immoral? In light of our history, we know that these people more often serve an agenda of disinformation of the public, than merely protecting personal beliefs. Every disinformant will find followers, who will refuse to be educated. If the world was good, we could educate these people by presenting facts and rational arguments. But human nature is not such. Stupidity is contagious. Sometimes we must have laws protecting humans from their own fallible nature. In this case, outspoken denial of historical facts is not an opinion, it is a danger. If such laws are deemed unconstitutional in the US, so be it. All I can say is that Germany today has one of the lowest rates of racially motivated hate crime in Europe, including the former socialist states.

If stupidity was contagious, I would be a conservative.

Repression of thought--and yes telling people they cannot publically deny the holocaust falls under this--leads to digression of intellectual thinking. When the generally accepted truth about history goes unchallenged, that's not good.

You might say that Germany has the lowests rates of racially motivated crime, but you cannot deny that the neo nazi movement is growing, partly due to repression of thought. What are people supposed to think if you jail people for claiming the holocaust did not exist? It doesn't help anyone.

If the government can deny your right to deny the right for your to deny the holocaust, they can deny you the right to do pretty much and say pretty much anything.

 

[Deegan]

This has to be the most ridiculous questions ever posed here, what exactly is the point?

Oh, I know, to further this disgusting idea that the holocaust was a myth, it shouldn't be illegal, but threads like this should.:roll:

I hope you have fun arguing with yourself here Finn.:doh

 

[FinnMacCool]

This has to be the most ridiculous questions ever posed here, what exactly is the point?

There are a few European countries, namely Germany, that make it a law that you cannot deny the holocaust happened. Perhaps things like that aren't relevant to you but they are to me. People have been given unfair treatement for expressing unpopular ideas, and this is just an example.

 

[Navy Pride]

This thread makes absolutely no sense and will go down in this forum as one of the most stupid of all time.......

 

[Missouri Mule]

I think a more appropriate action would be to permanently tattoo their forehead with "Stupid."

I've never been comfortable with arresting people for making stupid comments although they should be held up to ridicule for something like this. BTW, did Chomsky actually claim it didn't happen? I knew he was lower than a snake's belly but I didn't know he went that low.

 

[alphieb]

What kind of question is this? Perhaps, it's called denial to DENY such a thing. Perhaps, ignorance is bliss. I would rather think myself; that it did not occur.

 

[FinnMacCool]

BTW, did Chomsky actually claim it didn't happen? I knew he was lower than a snake's belly but I didn't know he went that low.

No he didn't but if you look him up on right wing websites, then you will find that he did=, which you surely will be doing.

 

[The Real McCoy]

That's been floating around the internet for years.

No, it's been floating around everywhere since June 25, 1977 when Chomsky and Edward S. Herman published their article "Distortions at Fourth Hand" in The Nation.

"The 'slaughter' by the Khmer Rouge is a Moss-New York Times creation."

It's absolute bullshit. I actually listened to the audio of that interview and it's not at all like right wingers make it out to be.

What interview?

He is one of the greatest leftist thinkers of our time so, of course, people will jump on the opportunity to sieze something to criticize him for. Of course, they've only gotten one on him.

The guy's a hack. Basically everything he says starts out with the conclusion that America is evil and then he works his way backwards.

If you had more, you would probably have a more compelling argument.

I've got much, much more.

BTw, if you want you should start an anti Chomsky thread. I realize that this was a shot at me but it would be nice if you could do it elsewhere.

Hey, that's a great idea! I think I will. Stay tuned.

 

[FinnMacCool]

When you make your new thread, be sure to post the actual source of the article, not just one from a right wing website.

 

[black wolf]

This is what I found as an explanation of why the current German law (which is similar to Austria, Switzerland, and paralleled by the laws of most other European countries) was passed as it is (my translation from wiki):

Criticism against the regulation expressed the German historian Ernst Nolte </wiki/Ernst_Nolte> who demanded to cause an "Objectivization of history" and rejected given "doctrines" or "evident truth". "History" - thus the historian, " is no legal object. In a free country it is neither a thing of the parliament nor the justice to define historical truth. "
The insertion of the paragraph goes back to a judgment of the Federal Constitutional Court </wiki/Bundesverfassungsgericht>. This looks at the denial as a " false fact assertion “ not protected by the law on freedom of speech, because it cannot contribute to the constitutionally presumed forming of an opinion. A minority opinion holds that herewith the statement of a certain opinion is made a punishable offense. The mentioned paragraph is thus law-dogmatically no „ general law “ for the purposes of articles 5 paragraphs 2 Basic Laws, but especially referring to an isolated case and therefore ineffective for the restriction of a fundamental right </wiki/Grundrecht>. The majority nevertheless viewed the human dignity of the persons pained or injured by such expressions of opinion as the right to be priorily protected.

 

[DeeJayH]

He is one of the greatest leftist thinkers of our time

:roll:

HE IS A DOUCHEBAG

 

[Missouri Mule]

No he didn't but if you look him up on right wing websites, then you will find that he did=, which you surely will be doing.

Chomsky has said about every other outrageous thing so it wouldn't have surprised me. He is a "respectable" version of Michael Moore. A lot of gullible people fall for his phony bulloney.

 

[vergiss]

This thread makes absolutely no sense and will go down in this forum as one of the most stupid of all time.......

Pray tell, why? Too many long words for you?

No, don't arrest them. But I reserve the right to give them a black eye.

 

[DeeJayH]

He is one of the greatest leftist thinkers of our time so, of course, people will jump on the opportunity to sieze something to criticize him for.

would you agree than, that Karl Rove is on of the greatest Rightist thinkers of out time.....