Is hoolocaust denial illegal in Denmark? I haven't read that. I know it is in Germany - whilst I don't agree with this for the same reason I support the publication of the cartoons - it's perhaps arguable that Germany requires a degree of special consideration due to its history.
The leaders of British Nation Party were just tried for some "hate speech" in Scotland.
They were acquitted on some charges and the jury was hung on others.
While am very watchful that this party could "step over the line", so far they seem to be a just a legitimate political party. I find the prosecution troubling, based on what I know so far.
Also, a party in the Netherlands was also banned for some positions that they took on immigration.
Let just say that although holocaust denail is not the easiest speech to defend (to put it mildly), we really need to preserve as much speech as we can stand less our particular issue be the next one on the list.
It is called defamation of the dead. Just as we have defamation of the living, countries like Germany have taken a special responsibility to ensure that there is no white-washing of their own hideous history.
An unflattering or inflammatory cartoon of Mohamed does not engage in any defamation. When you consider it in the context of the blatantly anti-semitic cartoons that come out of state-sponsored newspapers, you really have to wonder what all of the fuss is about.
The Arab world is the one where the double standards exist. This current disgraceful episode of violence was a sinister pre-meditated series of acts designed to retaliate against the current pressure being brought against Iran.
Where is all of the outrage from the left about calls to close down newspapers from the Arab world? Where is the outrage at the burning of embassies? Are Arabs against diplomacy? Should they intimidate free news sources into submission?
My original post was an opening salvo against the cartoon itself, which made a special effort to declare "something is rotten in the state of Denmark". This is obviously wrong - I think it's great that the Danes are at liberty to print these cartoons, and I haven't heard anything about holocaust denial being illegal there. Something clearly isn't rotten in the state of Denmark, yet the cartoon erroneously singled them out anyway.
As far as the countries whose media printed the cartoons, yet ban holocaust denial - this is a hypocritical position. I believe holocaust denial should not be criminalised - free speech is a right for all, even racist morons.
Come on Antony. As you quite well know only a handful of countries have banned holocaust denial and there is no comparison been criticising a religion and denying the holocaust. You are simply unwilling to accept that the reaction to these cartoons by the Islamic world has been so over the top and ridiculously excessive that it brings into questions the Islamic world's commitment or lack thereof to modern values including freedom of the press. Whether an editor of a paper should publish a cartoon is for the editor to make but they should not be intimidated with hysterical violent reactions by any group from doing so.
Johd - I barely understand your point, but what I'm getting is quite chilling. Who decides whether an agenda is at play? What's their agenda? Who decides where to let the axe fall on what's decided as agenda-pregnant speech?
Personally, I believe in extreme free speech - personal responsibility is everything; "incitement" is nothing if the individual incited is of age and of sufficient mental state.
Direct threats of violence, slander and libel are where I draw the line. I disagree that there is no comparison between criticising a religion and denying the holocaust. I strongly believe one should be able to announce to the world that they deny the holocaust - who does it really affect, apart from the PC brigade? I'm sure most Jews would treat the monosyllabic utterances of such the holocaust denying knuckledraggers with the uninterested dismissal they deserve.
Frankly, those who argue for the right of publication of these cartoons have a clear double standard if they think that holocaust denial should be prohibited as well.
Johd - Your devaluation of individual responsibility because an adult allows themselves to be swept away by (what you term) a "mob mentality" is specious.
And your idea about prosecuting to discover an "agenda" is ridiculous. The courts would be backed up for decades under this farce you envisage.
Who decides which agenda is permissable, and which isn't? I seldom come across a more ill-considered concept.
I imagine due to the presence of superior law (perhaps even constitutional law) which cancels out specific passages you cherry pick from (what you allege is) Danish legal code. Has it ever crossed your mind that there's a reason it hasn't been touched since 1938?
there does exist laws that prescribe the limits of free speech
Really? Are you an expert on Danish law? Thought not. Things are usually more complicated than a couple of cheap quotes you've Googled.
Anyway, when I laid out my opinions of the limits of free speech, I wasn't using Denmark as the benchmark of my ideal. Do try to follow my argument, there's a good chap.
Incidentally, I realise that people go on "the rampage" for all kinds of reasons. The difference between you and me is that I don't try to pin responsibility on a "mob" that you seem to think is less responsible for its actions than the sum of its parts - a group of free thinking individuals that have decided to act like animals.
That is mob law. A group of people who have - each and every one of them at one point in time - decided to discard the vestiges of civilisation.
There should be no added defence for the damage any individual may cause simply because s/he made a concious decision to run with a mob.
12 Comments:
Is hoolocaust denial illegal in Denmark? I haven't read that. I know it is in Germany - whilst I don't agree with this for the same reason I support the publication of the cartoons - it's perhaps arguable that Germany requires a degree of special consideration due to its history.
Where else is holocaust denial illegal?
You may just be missing the point James.
Enlighten me with whatever you think the point is, Iqbal. Then it's time for discussion.
The leaders of British Nation Party were just tried for some "hate speech" in Scotland.
They were acquitted on some charges and the jury was hung on others.
While am very watchful that this party could "step over the line", so far they seem to be a just a legitimate political party. I find the prosecution troubling, based on what I know so far.
Also, a party in the Netherlands was also banned for some positions that they took on immigration.
Europe is in a strange place right now.
Ah, I may have missed the point as well.
Let just say that although holocaust denail is not the easiest speech to defend (to put it mildly), we really need to preserve as much speech as we can stand less our particular issue be the next one on the list.
It is called defamation of the dead. Just as we have defamation of the living, countries like Germany have taken a special responsibility to ensure that there is no white-washing of their own hideous history.
An unflattering or inflammatory cartoon of Mohamed does not engage in any defamation. When you consider it in the context of the blatantly anti-semitic cartoons that come out of state-sponsored newspapers, you really have to wonder what all of the fuss is about.
The Arab world is the one where the double standards exist. This current disgraceful episode of violence was a sinister pre-meditated series of acts designed to retaliate against the current pressure being brought against Iran.
Where is all of the outrage from the left about calls to close down newspapers from the Arab world? Where is the outrage at the burning of embassies? Are Arabs against diplomacy? Should they intimidate free news sources into submission?
Still waiting for that elusive point, Iqbal.
My original post was an opening salvo against the cartoon itself, which made a special effort to declare "something is rotten in the state of Denmark". This is obviously wrong - I think it's great that the Danes are at liberty to print these cartoons, and I haven't heard anything about holocaust denial being illegal there. Something clearly isn't rotten in the state of Denmark, yet the cartoon erroneously singled them out anyway.
As far as the countries whose media printed the cartoons, yet ban holocaust denial - this is a hypocritical position. I believe holocaust denial should not be criminalised - free speech is a right for all, even racist morons.
Come on Antony. As you quite well know only a handful of countries have banned holocaust denial and there is no comparison been criticising a religion and denying the holocaust. You are simply unwilling to accept that the reaction to these cartoons by the Islamic world has been so over the top and ridiculously excessive that it brings into questions the Islamic world's commitment or lack thereof to modern values including freedom of the press. Whether an editor of a paper should publish a cartoon is for the editor to make but they should not be intimidated with hysterical violent reactions by any group from doing so.
Johd - I barely understand your point, but what I'm getting is quite chilling. Who decides whether an agenda is at play? What's their agenda? Who decides where to let the axe fall on what's decided as agenda-pregnant speech?
Personally, I believe in extreme free speech - personal responsibility is everything; "incitement" is nothing if the individual incited is of age and of sufficient mental state.
Direct threats of violence, slander and libel are where I draw the line. I disagree that there is no comparison between criticising a religion and denying the holocaust. I strongly believe one should be able to announce to the world that they deny the holocaust - who does it really affect, apart from the PC brigade? I'm sure most Jews would treat the monosyllabic utterances of such the holocaust denying knuckledraggers with the uninterested dismissal they deserve.
Frankly, those who argue for the right of publication of these cartoons have a clear double standard if they think that holocaust denial should be prohibited as well.
Johd - Your devaluation of individual responsibility because an adult allows themselves to be swept away by (what you term) a "mob mentality" is specious.
And your idea about prosecuting to discover an "agenda" is ridiculous. The courts would be backed up for decades under this farce you envisage.
Who decides which agenda is permissable, and which isn't? I seldom come across a more ill-considered concept.
I imagine due to the presence of superior law (perhaps even constitutional law) which cancels out specific passages you cherry pick from (what you allege is) Danish legal code. Has it ever crossed your mind that there's a reason it hasn't been touched since 1938?
there does exist laws that prescribe the limits of free speech
Really? Are you an expert on Danish law? Thought not. Things are usually more complicated than a couple of cheap quotes you've Googled.
Anyway, when I laid out my opinions of the limits of free speech, I wasn't using Denmark as the benchmark of my ideal. Do try to follow my argument, there's a good chap.
Incidentally, I realise that people go on "the rampage" for all kinds of reasons. The difference between you and me is that I don't try to pin responsibility on a "mob" that you seem to think is less responsible for its actions than the sum of its parts - a group of free thinking individuals that have decided to act like animals.
That is mob law. A group of people who have - each and every one of them at one point in time - decided to discard the vestiges of civilisation.
There should be no added defence for the damage any individual may cause simply because s/he made a concious decision to run with a mob.
Post a Comment
<< Home