Freedom of thought, Freedom of speech, Freedom of expression

#1
.............Doesn't always apply.

Canada Holocaust-Denier Ruling Hailed
February 25, 2005 8:23 PM EST

TORONTO - Jewish activists Friday hailed a court ruling that allows Canada to deport German Holocaust denier Ernst Zundel to face prosecution at home.

Zundel, author of "The Hitler We Loved and Why," has been held in a Toronto jail for two years while authorities determined whether he posed a security risk to Canadian society.

Federal Court Justice Pierre Blais said Zundel's activities were not only a threat to national security, "but also a threat to the international community of nations."

Zundel, a leading proponent of white supremacy, claims the Holocaust never happened.

In his 63-page decision released in Ottawa on Thursday, Blais called Zundel a racist hypocrite and said his Toronto home was a "revolving door" for some of the world's most notorious white supremacists who have promoted violence and hatred against Jews and minorities.

"It is time for Zundel's plane to take off. This should mark a closure to the tireless efforts of many to bring Zundel to justice," said Frank Dimant, executive vice president of B'nai Brith of Canada.

B'nai Brith and other Jewish organizations in Canada and the United States have for decades followed Zundel's activities and intervened in the legal proceedings against him.

"The impact of Zundel's removal from Canada is significant," said Len Rudner, national director of community relations for the Canadian Jewish Congress. "It's an indictment of hatred, an indictment of violence."

Zundel faces prosecution in Germany for his neo-Nazi and Holocaust-denying activities. Since the late 1970s he has operated Samisdat Publishing, one of the leading distributors of Nazi propaganda and since 1995 has been a key content provider for a Web site dedicated to Holocaust denial, according to the the Anti-Defamation League.

German authorities told the Canadian Press on Friday that Zundel would be picked up and arrested as soon as he arrived back in his homeland.

Zundel's lawyer Peter Lindsay said in statement that Zundel would not appeal and expected to be deported as early as next Tuesday.

"Probably no one cares because Mr. Ernst Zundel is notorious and reviled," Lindsay said. "The powerful and the popular do not need to rely on the fairness of our legal system. The marginalized and the reviled do. Our system has failed Mr. Zundel."

Zundel spokesman Mark Weber said Zundel was being persecuted for his personal beliefs.

"The government case is based on pretext, innuendo," Weber said by phone. "The judge cites no concrete basis that he is a threat to national security. He merely points out that Zundel met with people who, arguably, might be a threat to national security. That's not a crime. It's a dangerous precedent and it's a dangerous blow against freedom for Canadians."

Born in Germany in 1939, Zundel emigrated to Canada in 1958 and lived in Toronto and Montreal until 2001. Canadian officials rejected his attempts to obtain Canadian citizenship in 1966 and 1994. He moved to Pigeon Forge, Tenn., until he was deported back to Canada in 2003 for alleged immigration violations.

Zundel claimed in court that he is a peaceful man who has no criminal record or charges against him in Canada. Lindsay, his attorney, challenged the constitutionality of the security certificate review process, saying it violates his client's right to free speech and association.

The Canadian security certificate law, passed after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States, allows the government to hold terrorism suspects without charge, based on secret evidence that does not have to be disclosed to a suspect's defense.

Alan Borovoy, general counsel for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association said intelligence authorities may know of criminal offenses by Zundel, which cannot be disclosed for reasons of national security, but the detainment without charge or public evidence smacks of injustice.

"Zundel, I have no difficulty saying, is a nasty, nasty character and everything I'm saying is without the slightest sympathy for him," Borovoy said. "But the process in itself is unfair."

-----

On the Net:

Web site for followers of Zundel: www.zundelsite.org

Text of ruling: www.fct-cf.gc.ca/bulletins
Copyright 2005 Associated Press. All rights reserved.
 
#2
B'nai B'rith? Weren't they the same mob who got David Icke (Greeenpeace lizard hater) banned from speaking in the land of the Maple leaf? I have no truck with any denier of the Holocaust, living as I do within spitting distance of the Belsen Gedenkstatte, however this nutter's right to spew his vile propagandist ravings surely should be upheld as much as any straight- baiting peacenick whale fancier, or has the definition of free speech been given yet another overhaul a la George Orwell? More port...
 
#3
Themanwho said:
I have no truck with any denier of the Holocaust, living as I do within spitting distance of the Belsen Gedenkstatte, however this nutter's right to spew his vile propagandist ravings surely should be upheld as much as any straight- baiting peacenick whale fancier, or has the definition of free speech been given yet another overhaul a la George Orwell?
Agreed. I think I'm right in saying that in Germany denying the Holocaust is a criminal offence, but then you can possibly forgive them their sensitivity to the subject.

Even so, it takes irony to new heights when free speech is suppressed as a bulwark against fascism.
 
#4
There is freedom of speech then there is telling unpleaseant lies again and again .I have no sympathy for groups claiming freedom of speech who would curtail it themself if they ever got in power .
 
#5
woody said:
There is freedom of speech then there is telling unpleaseant lies again and again .I have no sympathy for groups claiming freedom of speech who would curtail it themself if they ever got in power .
I must agree with woody. With freedom of expression comes responsibility. This guy was spouting anti-semitic, anti-black and pretty much anti-anything not white rhetoric. This is not acceptable today and we wouldnt except that from any minority in this country (unless they are gonna vote for el capitan! :twisted: )

A_S
 
#6
Surely the whole point of freedom is that you can say whatever you believe. Just because we know he is talking utter sh!te and his views are abhorant to us, does not mean he can't say what his beliefs are. Remember that views are subjective and we probably upset him with ours. This is just another case of government being PC and censuring how we think and what we say.
 
#7
The old cliche of defending the right of any f*ckwit to speak his lack of mind still holds true. In any case I'm sure that Messrs Sue, Grabbit & Run or any other legal firm will happily oblige anyone with enough dosh in sueing said F*ckwit for slander, defamation or whatever, if what is being said is palpably untrue. Surely this is better than scary laws like the racial/ religious hatred thingy which it seems can be used for all sorts of nefarious purposes.
 
#8
Excellent post Woody.
 
#9
sc_obvious said:
Surely the whole point of freedom is that you can say whatever you believe. Just because we know he is talking utter sh!te and his views are abhorant to us, does not mean he can't say what his beliefs are.
Exactly - our Queen is the head of a church that bases its ideology and philosophy on a 2000 year old fable about a bloke who some people allege was the son of God. Who's to say if it's true or not - but we respect people's right to believe. Personally I think it's a daft fairy story, about as true as Santa Claus and the magic pixies, but I don't want her locked in the Tower for being insane!

Woops...I think there's some coppers at my door....
 
#10
In the US Constitution Freedom of Speech and Expression was meant to protect the people from the government when they spoke out against the government and its policies. This is evident since slander is not accepted and screaming fire in a crowded theater are not protected.

Currently the 9 men and women in black have declared that pornography, obscene and offensive art and other non-sense constitutes freedom of speech...

Zundle is an arrse and should be beaten with a rusty hammer and then set on fire.
 
E

error_unknown

Guest
#11
woody said:
There is freedom of speech then there is telling unpleaseant lies again and again .I have no sympathy for groups claiming freedom of speech who would curtail it themself if they ever got in power .
Chalk and cheese illogical cr@p. It's not to do with sympathy its to do with freedom you cnut.

Who decides what is true and what is not? Quis custodet custodes eh?

Ignoramus.
 
E

error_unknown

Guest
#12
Agent_Smith said:
woody said:
There is freedom of speech then there is telling unpleaseant lies again and again .I have no sympathy for groups claiming freedom of speech who would curtail it themself if they ever got in power .
I must agree with woody. With freedom of expression comes responsibility. This guy was spouting anti-semitic, anti-black and pretty much anti-anything not white rhetoric. This is not acceptable today and we wouldnt except that from any minority in this country (unless they are gonna vote for el capitan! :twisted: )

A_S
Who says it is not acceptable? You? Me? TCH?

Bunch of DDR Lib/Lab groupies
 
#13
[quote="Benjaminw1
Who decides what is true and what is not? Quis custodet custodes eh?

Ignoramus.[/quote]
Hello Pot, this is kettle over:
Try "quis custodiet ipsos custodes" :twisted: .

IMHO, too much worrying done about people being offended. My right to offend is more important than their right not to be offended - especially if I wasn't talking to them in fist f@cking place!
 
#14
I belive the canadians are taking a refreshingly old fashioned view on this chap.
German likes hitler obviously a wrong un (':twisted:')
lucky he was'nt shot as a spy (':roll:')
 
#15
that man was telling offensive lies deserves everything he gets
some truths are true water wet fire hot nazis bad .
Benjamminn 1 do you believe nutter who say the holocaust never happened should be able to spread lies as history ?
you wouldnt want some idiot telling people on tv that you can take drugs and fly why should he be able to lie and get away wit it
 
#16
woody said:
that man was telling offensive lies deserves everything he gets
some truths are true water wet fire hot nazis bad .
Benjamminn 1 do you believe nutter who say the holocaust never happened should be able to spread lies as history ?
you wouldnt want some idiot telling people on tv that you can take drugs and fly why should he be able to lie and get away wit it
Woody, who's to say what is a lie? Okay the blokes a repellent cnut, no doubt with his own nasty fascist viewpoint. But he's not slandering an individual or individuals, he's putting forward an (obviously warped) interpretation of history.

I personally think the Christian church talks a load of bollards and I think most religion is a bag of lies that people want to believe in. If I was to get into power would you be happy if I made it illegal to spread such lies?
 
#17
woody said:
that man was telling offensive lies deserves everything he gets
some truths are true water wet fire hot nazis bad .
Benjamminn 1 do you believe nutter who say the holocaust never happened should be able to spread lies as history ?
you wouldnt want some idiot telling people on tv that you can take drugs and fly why should he be able to lie and get away wit it
Woody, as long as they are only words and opinions, they can be countered with words and opinions of the opposite view. People can be presented with evidence of the holocaust.
That's normally how things should work. Yes this guy is a nut, but most people know he's a nut. It doesn't mean he deserves this treatment for his words and opinions.
Now if he had taken physical action against other people along with it, that would be a different story.

Mein Kampf and similar Books are still published and freely distributed for sale. Should the publishers be prosecuted and treated the same?
 
#18
Personally I think that the only line that should be drawn is that one between freedom of speech and incitement.

Some bloke spouting off that the holocaust never happened should be entitled to spout off and his right to do so should be protected to the hilt. Just because the majority think that he is talking b0llocks should not give anyone the right to try and shut him up.

The same guy actively encouraging people to go out and kill (for example) Jews should be forcibly silenced and prosecuted for incitement to commit a crime.

As much as a lot of us don't want to hear or listen to a hell of a lot of things that are said, we have absolutely no right whatsoever to try to silence people with opposing views, no matter how insane or distasteful we find them or whatever our views of "what they would do" if they were in charge are.

If we silence them just because we believe that they would silence us, it makes us no better than we perceive them to be.
 
#19
Hear, hear Aunty!

Very fine line at times between the individuals' freedom to voice an opinion thereby letting the public decide if it is worthy/b0ll0cks, and weirdos attempting to incite violence. Let them have their say then let the public have its say on them. I feel deporting him from Canada right away would have been so much better, this is a failing of that set of laws. One wonders why this man did not remain in the Fatherland considering he feels so strongly on the issue. Perhaps he viewed Canada as a safe haven from where he could froth without fear of imprisonment. Surely one who is so convinced he is right would be overjoyed to make himself a martyr to the cause by remaining and "fighting the good fight" on home soil. It works so well for all those 'terrorist mastermind' suicide bombers....

Similar issue out here with that David "Holocaust? What Holocaust?" creature. There seem to be a lot of these Holocaust deniers. I am at a loss some times to fathom from where did they spring. I presume as with many of these individuals they have self-esteem issues and need to oppress and control others to make themselves feel worthy and important. Obnoxious and putrescent as I may view their fanaticism I, unfortunately in the name of equality, must defend their ability to voice such opinions. However having taken these people up on their "have a look at our evidence" offer I found little of merit. This topic is a particularly poignant one for me as I had family members who survived the camps and many friends whose families were lucky enough to have family who managed to survive.


'ashrêy-hâ'iysh 'asher lo' hâlakh ba`atsath reshâ`iym ubhedherekhchathâ'iym lo' `âmâdh ubhemoshabh lêtsiym lo' yâshâbh
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top