10 months in jail for 87yo grandma who said Auschwitz was a labor camp.

a reply to: shooterbrody

It certainly seems that way

Those who react in an excessive manner to something someone says should be the ones being punished, if they cannot control their self then it's their fault not the words spoken by another

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: gladtobehere
a reply to: Willtell

You sir are correct, at-least that was supposed to be the point of this thread.

Not whether what she said was "wrong or right" or "offensive".

But whether Western nations should be imprisoning people over their views in a "free and democratic" society.

And the hypocrisy of doing so considering current day calls for the extermination of yet another group, all the while condemning other nations for being "repressive regimes".

It kinda amazes me how the holocaust is placed into some untouchable category, whereas virtually all other topics are allowed to be debated.

It also amazes me how many people on this thread support someone being imprisoned for daring to debate something..,,

She was jailed for breaking the law.
A law she knew she would be punished for breaking.

a reply to: verschickter

I have Bert Trautmans autobiography who was a POW here in England he ended up staying, most folk are decent and will treat even the enemy with dignity but war brings out the worst in folk.
I hope you and your country keep fighting anything like nazism

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: gladtobehere
a reply to: Willtell

You sir are correct, at-least that was supposed to be the point of this thread.

Not whether what she said was "wrong or right" or "offensive".

But whether Western nations should be imprisoning people over their views in a "free and democratic" society.

And the hypocrisy of doing so considering current day calls for the extermination of yet another group, all the while condemning other nations for being "repressive regimes".

It kinda amazes me how the holocaust is placed into some untouchable category, whereas virtually all other topics are allowed to be debated.

It also amazes me how many people on this thread support someone being imprisoned for daring to debate something..,,

It amazes me how far some folks here will stretch the definition of "debate" and the definition of "thought" just so they can argue.

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

It also amazes me how many people on this thread support someone being imprisoned for daring to debate something..,,

I have to wonder if in the past someone spoke passionately and the people were moved and listened, they became ashamed and are now afraid someone will move them to wrong action again with their speech. Thus they are afraid of themselves still.

At the end of World War 2 the Allies had complete control over Germany. Nobody even traveled without permission, no mail went uncensored nor stories written not approved by the Allied occupation forces. What an old woman may have seen is what she believed to be true. I fail to see the justice in her prosecution or the need for such a law in the first place.

It is currently pc to accuse the Germans at the time as being Anti-Semitic. What we fail to remember is that England and the US were also largely anti-Semitic and often referred to "the Jewish problem". Anti-Semitism was also quite bad in Eastern Europe and Russia. This is why emigration to Palestine became the default solution because countries like the US and England would not admit them.

Before and even during WW2 fully half of all Americans distrusted Jewish people.
The rest of world is not guilt free when it comes to the issue of Jews displaced during WW2.
en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: SeaWorthy
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

It also amazes me how many people on this thread support someone being imprisoned for daring to debate something..,,

I have to wonder if in the past someone spoke passionately and the people were moved and listened, they became ashamed and are now afraid someone will move them to wrong action again with their speech. Thus they are afraid of themselves still.

You mean like Hitler?

I too "am out".

Good day sirs.

a reply to: TheKnightofDoom

We try to not give them any ground. There has been cases where neo-nazis tried to buy houses for their "headquarter" and when it comes out, they are dropped. Leftist and middle were all together against it. In the end, the place got burned down by leftist anarchists. Not the way it should go, but it gives you a picture. At least here in the south. The east has other issues but it ties into history, it was old DDR.

originally posted by: gladtobehere
I too "am out".

Good day sirs.

Toodles

originally posted by: Jennyfrenzy
a reply to: gladtobehere

She isn't questioning it though. She flat out said:

From OP source:

During her defence she said that the Holocaust of six million Jews 'was the greatest and longest lived lie in history.'

That's a statement, plain and simple. No questions there, she called it a lie.

Freedom of speech includes freedom of opinion... Including statements.

The moment you legitimize such repressive laws is the moment you set precedence for laws that illegalize YOUR views.

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: gladtobehere
a reply to: Willtell

You sir are correct, at-least that was supposed to be the point of this thread.

Not whether what she said was "wrong or right" or "offensive".

But whether Western nations should be imprisoning people over their views in a "free and democratic" society.

And the hypocrisy of doing so considering current day calls for the extermination of yet another group, all the while condemning other nations for being "repressive regimes".

It kinda amazes me how the holocaust is placed into some untouchable category, whereas virtually all other topics are allowed to be debated.

It also amazes me how many people on this thread support someone being imprisoned for daring to debate something..,,

It amazes me how far some folks here will stretch the definition of "debate" and the definition of "thought" just so they can argue.

Absolute bull crap. Someone making a statement about the holocaust, even if wrong, is part of debate. Debate requires opposing views, open discourse, and free speech. That's impossible if some views are outlawed.

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

Very last post on this pathetic thread:

The moment was decades ago and still nothing happened. Get over it. We´re doing fine.
Here, freedom of speech ends where you insult others. In this case, she insulted dead people, which is a crime in it self and she denied holocaust. Not like in america where you can be a douchebag to everyone.

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: Jennyfrenzy
a reply to: gladtobehere

She isn't questioning it though. She flat out said:

From OP source:

During her defence she said that the Holocaust of six million Jews 'was the greatest and longest lived lie in history.'

That's a statement, plain and simple. No questions there, she called it a lie.

Freedom of speech includes freedom of opinion... Including statements.

Did you miss my post earlier that pointed out the the 1st only applies to the US?

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

The view isn't outlawed. The speech is. Somehow that keeps escaping you and others like you. She's welcome to move to America and say whatever she wants about the holocaust.

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: Jennyfrenzy
a reply to: gladtobehere

She isn't questioning it though. She flat out said:

From OP source:

During her defence she said that the Holocaust of six million Jews 'was the greatest and longest lived lie in history.'

That's a statement, plain and simple. No questions there, she called it a lie.

Freedom of speech includes freedom of opinion... Including statements.

Did you miss my post earlier that pointed out the the 1st only applies to the US?

You seem to have problems understanding that some laws are unjust.... And no, more places than just the US have freedom of speech..

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

The view isn't outlawed. The speech is. Somehow that keeps escaping you and others like you. She's welcome to move to America and say whatever she wants about the holocaust.

That's a stupid distinction.

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter
Aucshwitz actually was a labour camp so in that respect the lady was correct...................................... Maybe thefact that anybody unsuitable for doing the labour was immediately liquadised was an important point, but Auschwitz was a labour camp.

Correct, and i have the photo's to prove it ..... thanks to one of the Mods on here i may get to upload the pics ......... segregation YES, LABOUR forced YES, EXTERMINATION, yes, if you weren't fit enough, not excusing those actions

Oh, and, birds do sing at Oświęcim, or certainly in the woods surrounding it .. i heard for myself but ... never SAW a bird in Auschwitz

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: Willtell
democracy?

Freedom of thought?

She's free to think whatever she pleases. She hasn't been in trouble for what she thinks, but rather what she does about her thoughts.

freedom of speech applies here too.

The moment you make illegal disagreeing with majority culture or some historical concept, then you open the door to the government forbidding other things from being discussed. It's a very dangerous and slippery slope.

Well that slope is over 30 years old and nothing has happened.

You obviously lack historical understanding.

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: Jennyfrenzy
a reply to: gladtobehere

She isn't questioning it though. She flat out said:

From OP source:

During her defence she said that the Holocaust of six million Jews 'was the greatest and longest lived lie in history.'

That's a statement, plain and simple. No questions there, she called it a lie.

Freedom of speech includes freedom of opinion... Including statements.

Did you miss my post earlier that pointed out the the 1st only applies to the US?

You seem to have problems understanding that some laws are unjust.... And no, more places than just the US have freedom of speech..

The German high court doesn't seem to think it's unjust. And it's your opinion that it is, which means what?

Dick all, that's what.