David Irving Jailed
Pages
- 1
- 2
| Author | Topic: David Irving Jailed |
|---|---|
|
Nuke and Pave
Member # 24
|
written Wednesday, February 22 2006 14:44
Profile
Homepage
My first post on this thread doesn't make much sence. I guess I react to this subject so strongly that I typed that responce before thinking. However, I still think that German and Austrian laws that outlaw fashist parties are necessary (as well as Israeli law that outlaws an anti-Arab party) and that parties advocating killing groups of people shouldn't be legal in any country. (As far as I know, homophobic preachers don't advocate killing all gays. If they do, yes, I think their speech should be banned as well.) -------------------- Be careful with a word, as you would with a sword, For it too has the power to kill. However well placed word, unlike a well placed sword, Can also have the power to heal. Posts: 2649 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 6689
|
written Wednesday, February 22 2006 15:02
Profile
My personal take on Irving is that he's a bit of a dick. His book, Hitler's War, does tend to counter historical fact with opinions and such. Seems to me that he's either a manically fanatical neo-Nazi, or someone trying to sell a book (more likely). Either is pretty low to my standards. Yes, this Austrian law is denying him his free speech. Currently, no, their lack of something like the USA's First Amendment is not being used to oppress the socio-economically low, or to suppress the opposition of the government (Irving is British after all). I am still curious as to whether the maximum penalty of 10 years in jail (the maximum sentence for denying the Holocaust in Austria) is justified to be served by Irving. I mean, the impression he makes on people through his writing, speech and actions might be harsh enough. It does make him look like a capitalist buffoon after all. -------------------- --Dachnaz Posts: 50 | Registered: Saturday, January 14 2006 08:00 |
|
E Equals MC What!!!!
Member # 5491
|
written Wednesday, February 22 2006 15:07
Profile
Homepage
quote:So the Republicans should be banned because they advocate the death penalty for murderers? :P Sorry. -------------------- SupaNik: Aran, you're not big enough to threaten Ash. Dammit, even JV had to think twice. Posts: 1861 | Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00 |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Wednesday, February 22 2006 15:08
Profile
Homepage
quote:And that's why I chose said preachers for my counterexample. People who deny the existence of the Holocaust may well be vicious, rotten anti-Semites, but stating disbelief in a historical event is not the same thing as advocating murder. It may be related, but there is an important distinction. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
|
Triad Mage
Member # 7
|
written Thursday, February 23 2006 05:40
Profile
Homepage
The supreme court has made important free speech distinctions. From what I understand, if the speech is designed to incite lawbreaking and actually does or comes close, it can be censored, but just advocating breaking the law cannot be. -------------------- "At times discretion should be thrown aside, and with the foolish we should play the fool." - Menander ==== Drakefyre's Demesne - Happy Happy Joy Joy Encyclopedia Ermariana - Trapped in the Closet ==== You can take my Mac when you pry my cold, dead fingers off the mouse! Posts: 9436 | Registered: Wednesday, September 19 2001 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
|
written Thursday, February 23 2006 05:46
Profile
Homepage
quote:Why say sorry? The death penalty is a disgusting piece of legislature and ought to be abolished! Sorry. :P -------------------- Encyclopaedia Ermariana • Forum Archives • Forum Statistics • RSS [Topic / Forum] My Blog • Polaris • I eat novels for breakfast. Polaris is dead, long live Polaris. Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair. Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Thursday, February 23 2006 07:55
Profile
Homepage
quote:The Supreme Court's free speech decisions are kind of funny sometimes. They've decided that you have the right to say completely whatever you want as long as you can prove either that what you're saying is clearly false or that no one is listening. Other than that, your speech can be restricted. :P But that doesn't really do much for the discussion at hand, which doesn't concern U.S. law. I do think it's a little odd that the Holocaust has such a special status as the only thing that can't be denied; what about the Armenian genocide? Turks can go around denying that, and although it makes people a little uneasy, no one throws them in jail for it. -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
E Equals MC What!!!!
Member # 5491
|
written Thursday, February 23 2006 11:17
Profile
Homepage
quote:But would you be in favour of a situation where it was illegal to even support the death penalty? Even in the case of a Hitler or a guy who kidnapped, raped, and cannibalised 11 young children? -------------------- SupaNik: Aran, you're not big enough to threaten Ash. Dammit, even JV had to think twice. Posts: 1861 | Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 6096
|
written Thursday, February 23 2006 15:30
Profile
Homepage
In my opinion, a person shouldn't generally get a three month sentence for lying. Then again, it's difficult to draw a line on what a "hate crime" or some such is. Still, if this should be illegal, I think giving fines would have been enough. (I understand he didn't get the sentence for directly advocating violence...) Of course, there are also other limits to democracy than legal limits. Publicity plays a large role in who gets the sympathies and power (and who is seen as an important person). In my opinion, the mass media shouldn't have given the man such publicity. [ Thursday, February 23, 2006 15:35: Message edited by: *Milu* ] Posts: 77 | Registered: Sunday, July 10 2005 07:00 |
|
Councilor
Member # 6600
|
written Thursday, February 23 2006 15:47
Profile
Homepage
Originally by *Milu*: quote:I think a large, deliberate, public deception deserves jail time as much as any other crime. It would certainly reduce the amount of falsehoods. It's just the difficultly of implementing the plan and the endless philosophy debates on truth that would result that make it a horrible idea. Dikiyoba. Posts: 4346 | Registered: Friday, December 23 2005 08:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
|
written Thursday, February 23 2006 16:09
Profile
Homepage
quote:Now wait, which are you arguing - the legality of supporting it, or the penalty itself? In accordance with freedom of speech, supporting it should be legal. The crime of the one it is being advocated for has no bearing on the matter though. Your first argument can stand well on its own, and does not need what I think is an out-of-place appeal to emotion or popular opinion. 1. By far the minority of deathrow inmates are criminals of the magnitude you described. 2. Many of them have never had their guilt properly proven. An example is the executed murderer who was recently - posthumously - proven to be guilty by a DNA sample. It turned out he was guilty, sure - but the fact alone that there was sufficient doubt about his guilt that this had to be tested, and that it happened after his execution, shows how flawed the system is. You are attempting to argue that anyone who argues against the death penalty is valuing the right to life of a murderer (a "cannibal", no less!) higher than that of a lot of innocent children. This is wrong. Killing or not killing the criminal is not the only way to deter, prevent repeat offenses, and punish - and that are the primary objectives in penalties, right? A life sentence is perfectly practical. [ Thursday, February 23, 2006 16:25: Message edited by: Arancaytar the Grey ] -------------------- Encyclopaedia Ermariana • Forum Archives • Forum Statistics • RSS [Topic / Forum] My Blog • Polaris • I eat novels for breakfast. Polaris is dead, long live Polaris. Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair. Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00 |
|
E Equals MC What!!!!
Member # 5491
|
written Thursday, February 23 2006 17:01
Profile
Homepage
I am indeed arguing for the legality of supporting the death penalty and not the death penalty itself. I pulled out the "emotional argument" to demonstrate an extreme example, as it appeared that you were seriously advocating banning of pro-death penalty views. I hope you understand that it seemed fairly reasonable to assume that was what you were saying after you chastised me for apologising for frivolously suggesting that the Republican party should be outlawed. -------------------- SupaNik: Aran, you're not big enough to threaten Ash. Dammit, even JV had to think twice. Posts: 1861 | Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 1768
|
written Thursday, February 23 2006 17:27
Profile
Speaking from a completely numbers based point of view, it's a lot more economical to kill off repeat murderers. Sometimes in the case of a net gain in lives, and it almost always saves money (if done quickly and with a minimal amount of money invested, say, a bullet.) Of course, if you have any sort of heart at all (this includes Republicans,) you'd prefer a more…justice…ish way of administering…justice. -------------------- "Oh, North Wind, why frighten others? In Nature's family all are brothers. Puff and blow and wheeze and hiss; You can't frighten Shingebiss. Bring your frost and ice and snow; I'm still free to come and go. You can never frighten me, One who never fears is FREE!" -Shingebiss, the mighty duck Posts: 830 | Registered: Tuesday, August 20 2002 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Thursday, February 23 2006 17:39
Profile
Homepage
quote:Can no one take a joke? -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
|
written Thursday, February 23 2006 23:40
Profile
Homepage
Sorry, I should have marked it more clearly. In my defense, though, I did add a ' :P '. :P -------------------- Encyclopaedia Ermariana • Forum Archives • Forum Statistics • RSS [Topic / Forum] My Blog • Polaris • I eat novels for breakfast. Polaris is dead, long live Polaris. Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair. Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00 |
|
E Equals MC What!!!!
Member # 5491
|
written Friday, February 24 2006 15:06
Profile
Homepage
I actually thought that was some sort of dig at my "Sorry :P ", for making light of such a serious subject. Or something. -------------------- SupaNik: Aran, you're not big enough to threaten Ash. Dammit, even JV had to think twice. Posts: 1861 | Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 3980
|
written Saturday, February 25 2006 14:08
Profile
Homepage
David Irving just landed a publicity stunt while he is writing his next book. In the Austrian jail he will have the time - no distraction and will not have to worry about paying for food or rent. The fan crowd will just see that he is jailed for something he said several years ago and long recanted. They draw parallels to other frespeech topics like "valley of the wolves" and the Danish cartoons. The law may have made sense years ago but nowadays it is just counterproductive. I even caught myself looking up his biography in the Wikipedia. The dilemma resembles the intelligent design controversy. It does generate interest and requires constant competent discussion which is not a bad thing only that the discussion enhances the impression there must be something to it if someone competent cares about debunking it. Some of David Irving's books would make good examples for deconstruction in school - not in history or science but e.g in "Theory of Knowledge". [ Sunday, February 26, 2006 08:43: Message edited by: No 2 Methylphenidate ] -------------------- The opposite of love is not hate, it's indifference. The opposite of art is not ugliness, it's indifference. The opposite of faith is not heresy, it's indifference. And the opposite of life is not death, it's indifference. Because of indifference, one dies before one actually dies. (not mine) Posts: 311 | Registered: Friday, February 13 2004 08:00 |
Pages
- 1
- 2