I don't think anyone here has suggested that denying the holocaust should be illegal. That doesn't even seem to be the real point of this thread. It seems like Frank and Brett would rather discuss whether or not the holocaust actually happened. That discussion would probably be better suited in a thread of its own.

__________________
"Some years ago I had a sobering realization about women, which was that there are just too many nice ones. One simply can't fall in love with, sleep with, or marry all the nice women...One of the saddening facts of life is that there is always going to be a delightful woman somewhere who, for whatever accident of timing or attraction, simply slips by and recedes to return only in a dream."
-Larry McMurtry in Roads

Free speech is not absolute however:

This was from the case of Schenck v United States in 1919. The person who made this quote was Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. who was on the United States Supreme Court at the time.

So with this criteria, the question can be, "Does Holocaust denial present a clear and present danger that will bring about substantive evils?"

However, this criteria is irrelevant so far as European Union law is concerned.

In the thread that also carries the following perhaps
- Were some dinosaurs really big or is it a Jewish conspiracy to say so?
- Did the sun actually rise this morning or is it a Jewish conspiracy to say so?
- Did 9/11 really happen or is it a Jewish conspiracy to say so?
- Is the earth actually spheroid or is it a Jewish conspiracy to say so?
- Was there really ever a Roman Empire or is it a Jewish conspiracy to say so?
- Is 2 +2 actually 4 or is it a Jewish conspiracy to say so?

Ah, of course. I forgot about the infamous 2+2 Jewish conspiracy. Damn it, why must they always obfuscate the truth???

I think a whole new subforum is in order. The holocaust 'historical inquiry' would fit in quite nicely.

__________________
"Some years ago I had a sobering realization about women, which was that there are just too many nice ones. One simply can't fall in love with, sleep with, or marry all the nice women...One of the saddening facts of life is that there is always going to be a delightful woman somewhere who, for whatever accident of timing or attraction, simply slips by and recedes to return only in a dream."
-Larry McMurtry in Roads

...I do.

Seriously, I'm not trying to be hard headed. But when you consider that recorded history began roughly 6,000 years ago, anything that happened in the last 100 years is pretty recent. Airplanes are recent, nuclear power is recent, computers are recent, etc.

It's usually pretty easy to tell. Most of the holocaust deniers that I've heard make the news are already well known anti-Semites. Not once have I seen a case of an ordinary person presenting extraordinary evidence to prove the Holocaust was fake, merely out of an effort to set history straight.

Not at all. Holocaust deniers will use this line for a number of reasons. I've seen them use it to get a "foot in the door" by raising doubts of the veracity of the Holocaust. Once people accept this, they can introduce ideas that before would have been less palatable to ordinary folk. I've also seen holocaust deniers resort to this when their Holocaust denial is ripped apart and crapped on, in an attempt to get some sort of small victory.

And pro-Palestine sentiment isn't banned, either. I'm sure you're just as free to donate money to a Palestinian charity as you are an Israeli one.


Experimenting on my vacation? Are you crazy?

Fred Leuchter is just such a case. Not all of them are overtly anti-semitic. Check out Fred Leuchter. He became an expert on execution equipment in the U.S. and was called upon by the defense in Canada's Zündel trial. He went to Auschwitz and took samples from gas chambers and somehow came to the conclusion that the buildings he examined could not have been used for executions. He of course failed to examine the archives that contain detailed schematics of the equipment used because he assumed that Auschwitz remained unchanged from the war, but his "research" is often used by deniers. Leuchter is just an idiot but is not necessarily anti-semitic in the sense that neo-nazis are.

Thats why I said in general. You only have a right to not have congress make a law abridging speech. That doesnt mean you have a right to free speech. A state could still make a law restricting speech.

__________________
http://www.fairtax.org

Elminate all taxes on income and replace with a national sales tax.

Thanks, mpd8488. It would appear that Fred Leuchter would not be prosecuted under European laws, as well. Exactly the evidence I was looking for.

And what about accused 'anti-Semites' who criticise Israel? Using this reasoning they should be jailed for criticising that state because as 'anti-Semites' they are trying to subject Jews to negative view.

Or maybe they are not deniers but skeptics? Maybe they question the static 6,000,000 number because death tolls at the primary 'extermination' camp are unknown and have been revised downward?

How is this 'evidence' if your belief? Has he 'denied' the holocaust in any EU nation or revisited any EU nation since doing so if he did?

A U.S. State could try to pass such a law, but it could then be challenged in court. If such a legal decision was made based on legal precedent, then criteria set by Justice Holmes could come into play in such a legal decision.

Anyway, this is not about the United States. This is the European Union that is looking to do this.

The thing with the European laws is that even with court precedents there is no hard line to determine who will be charged. European courts (especially in Germany) view the dignity of the victims as a right that must be balanced with free speech (our precedents on free speech don't examine this). If it could be construed that Leuchter's statements were "a denigration of the memory of the dead" he could be charged. And honestly, though I don't believe that it should be a crime, I could see how this could be the case. Watching Leuchter chiseling away at stone in crematoriums and gas chambers in Auschwitz made me sick to my stomach. Had Leuchter gone to Europe and made his film widely available he may very well have been charged.

"Should Holocaust Denial Be A Criminal Offense [?]"

No. The fact that it is distasteful should not be part of law.

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them; speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition

Being an idiot shouldn't be a criminal offense.

__________________
This is my signature.
There are many like it, but this one is MINE.
My signature is my best friend. It is my life.

I agree with Bob Marley. Being an idiot shouldn't be a criminal offense and its not practical - we'd need more prisons.

__________________
"We are each our own devil, and we make this world our hell." - Oscar Wilde

If ignorance was a crime, some of the white racist fucks in this country would get the death penalty...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":




Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"