Location: Sugar beach, Sipalay, Negros, Philippines
Total Posts: 1,623
very bad idea for Holocaust denial to be made illegal in the UK. With some other countries, such as Germany, Austria and Israel, one can see there being a better case for it, but it's still a bad idea even then. If somebody wants to fly in the face of historical reality and make an idiot of themselves in public, then that's up to them - even if there's a small chance that some ill-educated brainwashed Islamist in Karachi might take them at their word.
very bad idea for Holocaust denial to be made illegal in the UK. With some other countries, such as Germany, Austria and Israel, one can see there being a better case for it, but it's still a bad idea even then. If somebody wants to fly in the face of historical reality and make an idiot of themselves in public, then that's up to them - even if there's a small chance that some ill-educated brainwashed Islamist in Karachi might take them at their word.
Or even an ill educated brainwashed numpty with no Islamist background.
I think my biggest concern is how it will effect history, for example, lets say that there are a few small details that are incorrect, and cannot be corrected due to being branded a holocaust denier and criminal.
Example, lets say the germans took a certain route one day and killed 100,000 at 12am on a certain day (taken from foreign intelligence).
But then in 10 years we find German archeology shows that they took a different route, and failed to kill anyone that morning as the bullet shipment had not arrived yet, so the targets (sorry bad pun) were not met.
But because the person is denying parts of the holocaust then are they be made criminal, even if archeology shows a difference to recorded history.
Or is it just another breach on peoples freedoms to believe what they want.
For example if my belief was that the world did not exist to me before I was born, so anything pre-birth never happened to me.
Would that make them a criminal?
People deny that the moon landings happened, that God exists and Monster Munch are better than Cheesy Wotsits - everyone entitled to their opinion I think
People deny that the moon landings happened, that God exists and Monster Munch are better than Cheesy Wotsits - everyone entitled to their opinion I think
I thought that God made the moon out of cheesy Wotsits?
It's not the function of government to legislate for peoples views and thoughts. Legislation should only ever be for actions.
For instance, it's not illegal to be a racist, but it is illegal to carry out racist actions.
That is true.
But starting up a website full of lies about the holocaust is anti-semitic hate material and is an action not just a thought.
The priest should be entitled to his views but he should be condemned for expressing them. Not for getting the history wrong, but for spreading racist lies.
This government of "closet Marxists" has already introduced legislation to prevent us voicing opinions that contradict aspects of its hideous doctrine.
Making holocaust denial illegal would be another step down that slippery slope.
If we were a truly democratic society we would have the freedom to express whatever opinion we wished, not just opinions approved of by the government.
As George Orwell once said: "Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear."
__________________
In every permissive liberal there's a perv waiting to "come out" - Moi.
But starting up a website full of lies about the holocaust is anti-semitic hate material and is an action not just a thought.
The priest should be entitled to his views but he should be condemned for expressing them. Not for getting the history wrong, but for spreading racist lies.
Ummm. What about this then...
"Moses held out his hand over the sea, and the LORD drove the sea back with a strong east wind. It blew all night and turned the sea into dry land. The water was divided, and the Israelites went through the sea on dry ground, with walls of water on both sides."
That's a lie ain't it? Should we ban the book we find that (and much more) nonsense in? Should we ban people from speaking and preaching such drivel?
"Praise be to Allah, Who created (out of nothing) the heavens and the earth, Who made the angels, messengers with wings,- two, or three, or four (pairs): He adds to Creation as He pleases: for Allah has power over all things."
That's a lie ain't it? Should we ban the book we find that (and much more) nonsense in? Should we ban people from speaking and preaching such drivel?
As tempting as it may be we simply cannot have government legislating against the telling of lies... not even really, really bad ones with the "R" word in front. Freedom of speech is what prevents tyranny.
It seems to me that with so many people around the world saying the holocaust didn't happen, you have to ask yourself if they know something the rest of the world doesn't. If its so easy to prove it did happen then why would they waste their time saying it didnt?
After all, the proof would certainly show they are wrong so why do they keep denying it?
The European Union's executive Commission proposed a European Union wide anti-racism xenophobia law in 2001, which included the criminalization of Holocaust denial. On July 15, 1996, the Council of the European Union adopted the Joint action/96/443/JHA concerning action to combat racism and xenophobia. During the German presidency there was an attempt to extend this ban. Full implementation was blocked by Britain and the Nordic countries because of the need to balance the restrictions of voicing racist opinions against the freedom of expression. As a result a compromise has been reached within the EU and while the EU has not prohibited Holocaust denial outright, a maximum term of three years in jail is optionally available to all member nations for "denying or grossly trivializing crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes."
Wow, that's a first, Britain standing up for freedom of speech! I actually agree with that and believe you can't legislate for people's opinions and thoughts, only for their actions.
I think most people believe history because they do not necessarily have an emotional bond with it, and so forth. History is build on the evidence that still exists in this day and age. With how we are, and how each country is quite loyal to its citizens, then sometimes this can indeed create a situation whereby other citizens will also question "how" that piece of history is told.
A lot of people do not deny the Holocaust from happening, but many people do question as to the extent of the horror and how it happened.
I do not think that this kind of questioning just stops at the Holocaust. Even now Japan refused to apologise to China for the Rape of Nanking. They say that it was a war, and that is what you do, to win your opponent, by force or by psychological attack. That did not go down well with the public, and the descendents of the women who were raped.
I agree that history can become the victim of the present as people interpret it as it suits them.
But to just forbid expression of the opinion that the holocaust didn't happen or that it wasn't as bad as recorded, is wrong.
1. If no-one can deny something, then no-one has any reason to defend it. It just becomes a legend, then a myth, then is dismissed as something that could never have happened. If people are allowed to deny it, someone will have to hang on to the evidence to prove them wrong.
2. If you can forbid the expression of one misguided historical opinion, then why stop there? We could forbid certain aspects of discussions of the slave trade or Cromwell's campaigns in Ireland, or any other controversial topic where we think we already know what happened. Eventually history will become a list of things that people are ordered to believe, rather than an ongoing process of investigation into the past based on evidence.
Freedom of speech is what prevents tyranny.
