Holocaust denial writer jailed for five years

http://www.guardian.co.uk/secondworldwar/story/0,,2014554,00.html ^

[Muentzer2005]

A German neo-Nazi publisher was yesterday sentenced to five years in prison for inciting racial hatred and denying that the Nazis murdered six million Jews.

Ernst Zündel, who was extradited from Canada to face trial in Germany in 2005, received the maximum sentence available for the crime of Holocaust denial after being found guilty on 14 counts ...

"You might as well argue that the sun rises in the west, but you cannot change that the Holocaust has been proven," he said, referring to Zündel's work Did Six Million Really Die? The prosecution accused him of using "pseudo-scientific methods" in an attempt to overturn the accepted facts on the Holocaust.

But campaigners for Zündel, 67, said he was a peaceful advocate of the right to free speech who was being denied that right. His supporters filled the courtroom.

At the close of the trial Zündel - who also wrote The Hitler We Loved and Why, and has described Hitler as "a decent and very peaceful man" - asked the court in Mannheim to set up an international commission of historians to explore the Holocaust. He said he wanted "hard facts" and not just witness statements, and that if the commission could prove Jews were gassed he would "hold a press conference at which I would publicly apologise to Jews, Israelis and the world".

[Old Professer]

We needn't worry so much about our rights being taken from us if your comment is typical since it seems too many of us are willing to give them away for a little temporary comfort.

[Old Professer]

The incitement charge is the only part that is plausibly portable; the right to some free speech.

[veronica]

I tend not to take the word of Neo-Nazis.

[The Pack Knight]

I'll do my best to answer. Would you use the "free speech" argument to defend a person who yelled: "FIRE", in a crowded theatre, when there was none?

No, of course not. The difference is that in this example, which is based on a popular misquote from Oliver Wendell Holmes' opinion in Schenk v. United States, panic would, understandably, be immediate, and there would be no chance for anyone to rebut our panic-mongerer and point out that there was no fire before the predictable damage had been done.

In the case of Holocaust deniers or Islamofascist firebrands, their ideas, which I despise as much as you do, are expressed in an open and ongoing public discussion. People who disagree with Zundel's version of history have had ample time to rebut him, and besides, no reasonable person could say that any sort of violence MUST predictably follow from the publishing of his books. Likewise with the Koran, or our hypothetical Islamofascist imam. If he says it is God's command that all Muslims kill the infidel wherever he can be found, that's a general statement that is exposed, at least in free countries, to ample public rebuttal and rightful ridicule. Now, if he tells one or more of his followers specifically to find a crowded area and blow themselves up on Tuesday, that's quite a different matter. The difference should be clear.

It would be very interesting to see how different the reaction of many, who would have no limits on free speech, would be if their favorite web site, and its membership, were slandered (or libeled, if you prefer) with the obvious intent of causing it, and them, irreparable harm.

As has been said here before, the victims of slander and libel have access to civil redress for damages. We don't jail or criminally prosecute those who engage in slander or libel in this country, or use the police power of the state to engage in prior restraint of their speech, and for good reason. So no, I would not wish to throw liberty out the window in order to protect my favorite web site (of all things) from slander.

[Old Professer]

I'm waiting for the next "Hottest (insert month, day, hour, etc.) Ever" headline before I get really concerned.

[veronica]

Of all the arguments against jailing Zundel, that is among the most specious.

[ex-snook]

What is the definitive book documentating the six million deaths in Germany? I can't recall ever hearing about one.

[veronica]

In the case of Holocaust deniers or Islamofascist firebrands, their ideas, which I despise as much as you do, are expressed in an open and ongoing public discussion.

Holocaust denial IS NOT about an open discussion, nor "correcting history." The Holocaust is among the most investigated and documented events in history. The agenda of the Holocaust denier is about other matters.

[veronica]

I notice you provide no link to that material.

It's quite interesting which sites pop up when I Google the title of the article...France: Call by 19 Historians for the Repeal of Several Statutory Clauses....

The first three sites are hard-core Holocaust denial websites.

[The Pack Knight]

Holocaust denial IS NOT about an open discussion, nor "correcting history." The Holocaust is among the most investigated and documented events in history. The agenda of the Holocaust denier is about other matters.

The ongoing discussion is between Holocaust deniers and those who rightly point out that Holocaust deniers are full of excrement. I never said that the Holocaust was in doubt. The validity of what one has to say has little or no impact on one's right to say it. I know he has an agenda. He probably hates Jews and is sympathetic to National Socialism. That doesn't change the fact that expressing these ideas is not a crime in this country, and shouldn't be in Canada or Germany. No one is directly harmed by them. If someone reads his book and then decides for some reason to go kill Jews, he will have undoubtedly heard both before and after reading the book that the Holocaust did indeed happen, and that the evidencing proving that to be true is overwhelming. He will have chosen not to believe it. Human beings are responsible for their own choices, beliefs, and actions. Now, if someone has evidence that Zundel was engaged in an active conspiracy to actually murder Jews or overthrow the government of the Federal Republic of Germany in order to bring about the Fourth Reich, I'm all ears.

I am NOT defending Zundel. I would not feel sorry for him if he died in prison. I am defending liberty. Part of liberty is having the strength to put up with other people exercising theirs in ways you don't like.

[MHalblaub]

In a real warped way, I'm always proud to see a small band of skin-heads marching down the street with a few guys in hoods, etc. "What a great country" I think, that even idiots like these have the right to march down the street. (With the proper permits etc. and if they keep from breaking windows, etc.)

They got the same rights in Germany, France or elsewhere in Europa.

But in Germany is a special law according to the denying of the Holocaust. Why?

Well, even here on FR is a limitation to free speech. I would never say "F**K OFF" to anyone but posts including such statements will be deleted as a personal offence.

The German legislative concluded denying of the Holocaust as an offence to the Holocaust survivors or as an offence to the one slaughtered. To protect survivors or surviving dependents no individual has to put it on trail it is commission for attorneys of the state to do it for them.

[Muentzer2005]

Freedom of speech is a bitch.
I know.

If you read french go to mainstream french newspapers and read what they said about this petition. Those historians are not holocaust deniers or "revisionist" writers'.

I notice how instead of arguing you make insinuations/innuendos about people.

Are you impliying that those who don't agree with you are veiled holocaust deniers?

How precious.

http://www.histoire.presse.fr/petition/sommaire.asp

[P-Marlowe]

Someday there will be prosecutions of those of us who deny that Global Warming is caused by automobile emissions. Someday it will be a crime to be a Global Warming denier.

Off to the reeducation camps.

[Michael81Dus]

There is no prohibition to question alleged facts. However, to question a sum of historical facts which are proven and documented with the intention to defend the Nazi regime or express support for it is criminal. Dumbness isn´t a crime, but intentional misleading of others/spreading Nazi propaganda very well is.

[volunbeer]

I wrote earlier - "What do you want to bet he is offered an honorary doctorate and job at an American university upon his release?"

I did not comment on his right to say/write what he said. My post had little to do with this man or the specifics of his case.

While I support the right of free speech it is not absolute even in our own society. I took the opportunity to point that out with sarcasm.

I do not support the right of Ward Churchhill in a taxpayer funded institution of learning to promote a theory among young people that is patently false. If Churchhill on his own time and dime wanted to say the things he did I have no issue with his right to do so.

Would any of you promote that anything said in any setting is fine because it is free speech? That seems to be a formula for anarchy (especially in schools).

Do our laws and consitution and the laws of Canada outweigh the laws of Germany when the alleged crime took place in Germany and the GERMAN fled to avoid prosecution?

Having lived in Germany where I was able to tour several death camps I understand why the German nation feels obliged to protect the truth so "that it may never happen again".

[xzins]

if the commission could prove Jews were gassed he would "hold a press conference at which I would publicly apologise to Jews, Israelis and the world".

Would all of the murdered please step forward and give your witness statements?

The same with all the long dead by now guards. If the guards were 20 in 1945 then they are 82 right now. Since, comparatively speaking, very few were assigned this duty, actuarial data would say that you'll find very few living to testify.

[veronica]

As regards Zundel, I do not view this as a free speech issue.

[veronica]

If the commission could prove Jews were gassed he would "hold a press conference at which I would publicly apologise to Jews, Israelis and the world"...

Deceit & Misrepresentation - The Techniques of Holocaust Denial

[mc5cents]

Personally I think holocaust deniers are knuckleheads, but putting them in jail for it is just plain over the top.

Agreed. I say deport him to the Phillipines where he can join up with Art Bell.

[veronica]

I made plenty of arguments, you just don't agree with me. Do I think those who defend Holocaust deniers might be Holocaust deniers? They may be in some cases.