----- Original Message ----- From: "Vivec" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Community" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 2:56 PM Subject: Re: Freedom of press- just don't question the holocaust.
>> Because the only people denying it as a historical fact are those >> attacking >> Jews. It's also attacking the history of the country in case. If a >> country >> says that attacks on it's history is not allowed, then.... > > I would disagree. There have been debates that did not involve > attacking jews where people questioned the extent of the holocaust, or > whether it even happened. not all these people hate jews. Rare. Very rare and many times is not so 'innocent'. > And the question is not whether or not the speech is anti-semitic, the > question is why is anti-semitic speech widely recognised as being > irresponsible to publish and an accepted curtailment of Free Speech > when and other types of bigotry, or racism, religious insensitivity > etc. does not enjoy such understanding. Ah, there is a difference. Holocaust denial is curtailed. Anti-Semitic speech is not. Austria had an anti-Semitic politician a few years back and he made lots of speeches that were anti-Semitic and had no problems because there are no laws against that. Papers make anti-Semitic (or the new code name, anti-Israel) speeches and reports all the time and there's no problems. There is a distinct difference to be drawn here. The Holocaust as a historical event is protected by certain European laws. Speech against Jews is not. >> Because this isn't an opinion. This is rejection of historical fact for >> the >> singular reason of attacking a specific group. No one else has this done >> to >> them. People who hate blacks don't deny the slave trade. People who hate >> Muslims don't deny the Crusades. It's only people who hate the Jews who >> deny >> the Holocaust. Show me a comparable response where history is manipulated >> to >> attack another. > > "The Rwanda genocide was planned. That what the recent war crimes > trials were about in Rwanda and in Uganda. > > As for Serbia and Bosnia, that was planned - that is what has come out > in the Mlosivec's trial." > > As for an instance where history is manipulated to attack another, how > about the recent Muslim expose where the religion is demonised and > their primary prophet referred to as a goat herder and a common thief? > Aren't all people that say those things intent on attacking > Jews....err...I mean Muslims? And this happened where? Where there laws against speech against Jews..err.. I mean Muslims in the country in question? Bottom line is that there are lots of anti-Semetic pictures, reports and speeches all across Europe without even having to look at the Arab world. There are the same in America as well. No laws there or here against it. Yes, the people who say/print such things can be sued on a personal level, but that's not a governmental law. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:198636 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
