Posted on 11/23/2002 7:38:12 AM PST by kosta50
I'm still waiting for that missing link you never provided....some shred of credible evidence to your anecdotal claims...
and some explanation/retraction of that fuzzy math of yours in #34
As for his party, it is so miniscule as to never have won an election even on the most local of levels. I doubt it could win an election in Scwartz's own home.
You're making a tempest out of a teapot. His party has never polled even 1%, while Seselj's fascists have polled upwards of 30%.
Freedom of speech? How despicable.
Croatia has only recently decided to join the rest of the civilized world by passing a law that will prohibit such "freedoms" of expression as hate speech and Nazi symbols.
No doubt, this will leave some people very disappointed.
Mladen Schwartz and his fascists organization is indeed a marginal political entity in Croatia, but hate speech is not just limited to political periphery as you seem to imply.
In 1991, Franjo Tudjman, Croatia's president and number one member of one of Croatia's largest (not smallest!)politcial parties (HDZ), was quoted by the Jerusalem Post (December 21) as having said "I am a doubly lucky man; my wife is neither Serbian nor Jewish."
You have yet to explain to me how 125,000/365 comes to 3,000 in your "math," and you still have to provide a credible source to show that Mladen Schwartz was born in Belgrade, and is a "Serbian Jew," and a Yugoslav secret agent openly "hiding" in a Croatian fascist party, as you claim. There are more obvious attempts at dysinformation on your part, but I will leave those for now in reserve.
Let's get one thing clear: this thread is not about Serbs disliking freedom of speech. This is about you continuously and intentionally providing misleading & false information.
Because Pavelic's wife was Jewish, and Tito's was Serbian...meaning he was neither a fascist nor a communist. Everyone knows what he meant, it's just taken out of context.
Don't take my word on Schwartz, that's fine. He's a nobody, unlike Seselj who polls at such high levels.
thank you for for repeating to the entire list the methodology of Croatian Nazi revisionism:Lie always. Childishly, obviously, cunningly, expertly, any way, always lie, lie. Eat up all available time, appeal to those who have no previous knowledge. When cornered with facts, change subject, accuse those who have caught you in lie, obfuscate, all in hope Croatian crime will be forgotten.
Here is some info from Croatian allies:
Increased activity of the bands is chiefly due to atrocities carried out by Ustaša units in Croatia against the Orthodox population. The Ustašas committed their deeds in a bestial manner not only against males of conscript age, but especially against helpless old people, women and children.
The number of the Orthodox that the Croats have massacred and sadistically tortured to death is about three hundred thousand.
Report to Reichsfuhrer-SS Heinrich Himmler from the Geheime Staatspolizei (Gestapo), 17 February 1942
“the leading Ustasha maintain that one million Orthodox Serbs (including babies, children, women and old men) were slaughtered. … on the basis of reports that I received , my estimate of the number of defenceless victims is three quarters of a million.”
Neubacher, Herman*: Sonderauftrag Suedost 1940-1945 Bericht eines fliegendes Diplomaten, 1956 page 31 (German edition)
(*Hitler’s Special Plenipotentiary for Southeast Europe.
Present day Croats are not guilty of crimes commited by their parents and grandparents, but are guilty of Nazi revisionism and the completion of the eight phase of the genocide (denial)
If any German dared say Hitler murdered 600,000 Jews he would face the legal system.
For Croats, saying Ustasha kiled 80,000 Serbs is a thing of national pride, free of any legal consequences.
My father was killed by the Ustashe, and much of my family inprisoned by them. You're just a typical racist.
Uhh. Actually, hate speech is allowed in the US. (Outside of colleges, anyway.) See, there's this little thing called the 1st Amendment to the Constitution.
They're whittling away at it, and hate crime laws are used to punish any acts committed by people who use hate speech more severely than the same acts committed without the speech. But the 1st still stands.
Hooray!
Actually, Franjo Tudjman was both! He was a Tito's communist general (one doesn't get to that rank by being politically incorrect), and then he invited all his Ustasha friends from abroad and at home to help him restore all the fascist symbols of Pavelic's monster child.
You couldn't have said it better DTA. I wish you or someone else would tell JTA this little truth. Maybe they will revise their gullable editorials. At any rate, joan pointed out that Stella Jatras commented to JTA about the same article as I did on this Forum.
There is speech that is protected under the 1st Amendment are speech that is not. If you yell "Fire" in a crowded movie theater, where there was no fire, you have not acted. You just spoke, right? Well, that "speech" is not protected, i.e. allowed because of the intended goal.
First Amendment stands inasmuch as the legal experts agree on its scope. The Amendment itself is very clear -- it places no limit to the freedom of religion or speech, and it gives the Congress no power to abridge them by laws. The crux is the definition of speech...and that can be rather interesting.
If you are willing to read through some of it, here is the link.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.