German gets 5 years for denying Holocaust

[DixieFlatline]

While I definitely don't agree with this guy, this seems extreme. I'm also surprised by Canada's role.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,252383,00.html

German Activist Ernst Zundel Gets 5 Years for Denying Holocaust

Friday , February 16, 2007

MANNHEIM, Germany —

A German court on Thursday convicted far-right activist Ernst Zundel and sentenced him to five years in prison for Holocaust denial in a case that underlined Germany's determination to prosecute people who claim the Nazis didn't murder six million Jews. The 67-year-old Zundel, who was deported from Canada in 2005, was convicted on 14 counts of inciting hatred for years of anti-Semitic activities, including contributing to a Web site devoted to denying the Holocaust -- a crime in Germany.

Zundel showed no emotion when Judge Ulrich Meinerzhagen read the verdict, only nodding occasionally.

Zundel, who has also lived in Tennessee, and his supporters argued that he was a peaceful campaigner being denied his right to free speech.

His attorney, Ludwig Bock, said he would appeal.

"What is notable is the iron-hard refusal of the court to allow consideration of new scientific findings or expert opinions," Bock said.

Prosecutors in Germany were able to bring charges because the Web site is accessible there.

The German prosecution won praise from Bnai Brith Canada, a Jewish human rights group.

"The case of Ernst Zundel demonstrates clearly the strength, determination and resolve of Germany's hate crimes legislation, in stark contrast to our own," executive vice president Frank Dimant said in a statement. Dimant said Canadian hate crimes laws did not specifically recognize Holocaust denial as a crime.

Zundel faced 14 counts of incitement for disseminating anti-Semitic propaganda through a series of pamphlets and the Web site. Denying the Holocaust can bring three months to five years in prison.

His trial began in November in this southwestern city after an initial attempt to try him collapsed in March 2006 over a dispute with one of his attorneys, Sylvia Stolz.

At one stage, she was carried from the courtroom, screaming "Resistance! The German people are rising up," after she defied an order banning her from the trial on grounds she tried to sabotage the proceedings by denouncing the court as a "tool of foreign domination."

During the current trial, Bock quoted from Adolf Hitler's "Mein Kampf" and from Nazi race laws in his closing statements last week as argued for Zundel's acquittal.

Bock accused the Mannheim state court of not wanting to face a "scientific analysis" of the Holocaust and charged that prosecutors -- one of whom has termed Zundel a "rat catcher" -- had defamed his client.

Another of Zundel's five attorneys, Herbert Schaller, told the court that all of its evidence that the Holocaust took place was based only on witness reports, instead of hard facts.

In his own closing arguments, prosecutor Andreas Grossmann called Zundel a "political con man" from whom the German people must be protected, widely quoting from his writings, which argue that millions of Jews did not die at the hands of the Nazis.

"You might as well argue that the sun rises in the west," Grossmann said when asking that Zundel be given the maximum sentence. "But you cannot change that the Holocaust has been proven."

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

Mannheim prosecutors were able to open a case against Zundel because his Holocaust-denying Web site is available in Germany.

In February 2005, a Canadian judge ruled that Zundel's activities were not only a threat to national security, but "the international community of nations" as well.

A Canadian 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 or his defense.

Zundel was deported a few days later.

Since the late 1970s, he had operated Samisdat Publishing, one of the leading distributors of Nazi propaganda and, since 1995, had been a key content provider for a Web site dedicated to Holocaust denial.

Zundel has claimed he is a peaceful man with no criminal record against him in Canada.

[alexey]

"What is notable is the iron-hard refusal of the court to allow consideration of new scientific findings or expert opinions," Bock said.

Sounds awfully familiar to the Global Warming "debate". Props to Germans for decisively dealing with this issue.

[Midnight Judges]

I wouldn't agree that we would ever need a law like that over here but the amount of sympathy I have for this scum < 0.

[rictus58]

This is just wrong. He wasn't even in Germany. Blame Canada.

[dreamingwolf]

This is just wrong. He wasn't even in Germany. Blame Canada.

at first that was my reaction too, but it appears he is still only a german citizen and hasnt got citizenship anywhere else and ontop of that for the last decade hes been producing political propaganda documents which Im guessing were be distributed arround germany.

So its not like they just plucked an american out of their home to stand trial in germany for his political beliefs, they plucked a german citizen with no citizenship in the country he was operating in to stand trial for his political beliefs.

so I have no problems with what they did. germans can treat themselves however they want, I think its pretty messed up but I can understand how that nation might feel like they have something to prove to the world when it comes to nazi's.

[RVAbrendan]

Wow, I've heard the argument that 'holocaust deniers' use, which is not as many Jews died in the hands of the Nazi's as the history books say, since the level seems to fluctuate periodically (which I have no sympathy for, just for the record), but to deny that the Holocaust even happened? Are you kidding me?

[Blighty Skins]

Disgusting, that's all I can say. This is Nazism in reverse. Lock someone up just because they think differently. And it's Germany and Austria instigating these Nazi-like laws (anyone see the irony in that?) and trying to force everyone to adopt them through the backdoor by using the European Parliament.

The mad Austrians locked up a British historian (Irvine) just for the same insane reason. Yet people who go around killing other people get alternative sentences to prison. :doh:

Oh yeah...sort of reminds me about the new EU law. Acoording to the EU, picking wild flowers is a punishable offence with up to two years in prison. Picking wild flowers?

Effin EU and stupid politicians...

Oh yeah...and the Germans are trying to take advantage of the EU presidency to push one of their other stupid laws..Make swastikas in books,videos,games or any other media illegal. Which is plainly stupid, considering they wont be historically accurate.

Can blimming Germans and Austrians just eff off or something?

[chomerics]

I completely disagree with their sentence and placing this man in prison.

i find the hypocrisy astonishing, and mildly amusing on the outside. Here you have Germany locking a man up for saying what he believes. . .wasn't that how the holocaust was started?

yes, they have a right to act Draconian in their own country, but it does not make it right.

[Air Force Cane]

It is against German law to deny the Holocaust.

While I support the First Amendment, based on German history I am not too troubled with this law.

[JMS]

Wow, I've heard the argument that 'holocaust deniers' use, which is not as many Jews died in the hands of the Nazi's as the history books say, since the level seems to fluctuate periodically (which I have no sympathy for, just for the record), but to deny that the Holocaust even happened? Are you kidding me?

I'm against thought crimes. I think these holocost deniers with their "new evidence" should be free to make their case in bars, on the internet and even and especially in institutes of higher learning. They should also be free to beable to convince all the folk they can, and free to assemble the most convincing argument they can. Outlawing thought is always counter productive.

Facts are there are millions of documents and tens of thousands of recorded first hand witnesses which would flatten any of there "evidence". It is impossible to disprove reality. There is no lack of motivated people to confront this "new scientific evidence", or any holocost deniers. Any such "new evidence" which comes to light would certainly be exposed as stupid or outwrite manufactured dribble when faced with the overwhelming documentation avalible. What worry's me is when the offensive thought/speach is outlawed with no forum to be expressed, examined and countered. When forced underground it is denied the confrontation with the overwhelming evidence which would disprove it. That buffer creates the safe haven for the falsehoods to grow, fester and challenge historical fact.

These Holocost deniers are not that uncommon today. One such "believer" accosted Ellie Weizel out in San Fransisco last week. Physically assaulted a Nobel Peace Prize winner. Tried to force the old man into a hotel room for who knows what. Jail should be reserved for guys like that who take their "concepts" to the next level.

You can't both jail the messenger, and effectively fight the message...

just my opinion...

[Blighty Skins]

On the one hand, Austria jails anyone who denies the Holocaust. On the other, they sell arms to Iran, which it's President has repeatedly and publicly denied the Holocaust. What does that tell you?

For the record, I believe the Holocaust happened. Though at what scale I wont comment on seeing I never really researched it. Though someone who did, a British historian, was jailed in Austria because of his reasearched beliefs.

I see Germany and Austria haven't changed much from their goose-stepping days?

[JMS]

On the one hand, Austria jails anyone who denies the Holocaust. On the other, they sell arms to Iran, which it's President has repeatedly and publicly denied the Holocaust. What does that tell you?

For the record, I believe the Holocaust happened. Though at what scale I wont comment on seeing I never really researched it. Though someone who did, a British historian, was jailed in Austria because of his reasearched beliefs.

I see Germany and Austria haven't changed much from their goose-stepping days?

The British "historian" was a nut job. The Germans wrongfully jailing him for creating his own flawed version of history doesn't make that neo Nazi theorists any more correct.

[Sisyphus]

This goes a lot further than 'thought crimes' or the 'right to free speech'. This is not some academic calculating that the number of Jews being exterminated may not have been 6 million but 'only' 5.5 million or some lower number.

Holocaust denial has been used to enable fascism and a neo-Nazi agenda. People who are prosecuted are because they are promoting a conspiracy theory that is used to intimidate and leads directly to hate crimes against Jews and minorities.

Cross-burning with the intent of intimidating someone is illegal in Virginia. Is that a simple free speech issue too?

[phishhead]

Wow, I can't believe how many people here feel it is okay for the state to decide what history is, and to jail those who question or don't believe it.

I find it appalling that someone would suggest the holocaust never happened, or to deny the severity of it, but the state throwing that person in jail for having that opinion is equally appalling.

[Midnight Judges]

I completely disagree with their sentence and placing this man in prison.

i find the hypocrisy astonishing, and mildly amusing on the outside. Here you have Germany locking a man up for saying what he believes. . .wasn't that how the holocaust was started?

yes, they have a right to act Draconian in their own country, but it does not make it right.

I don't agree that this is hypocrisy, it's reactionary. That is not to say hypocrisy cannot be reactionary, but given their history, there is possibly a little over compensation going on. I can see the point against thought police, but holocaust denials are intended to lead to the assault on Jews, and they often do. It's a grey area between inciting violence and free speech.

If I were a German Jew, I would likely support these laws but never any other anti-speech laws.

[Predicto]

For the record, I believe the Holocaust happened. Though at what scale I wont comment on seeing I never really researched it. Though someone who did, a British historian, was jailed in Austria because of his reasearched beliefs.

FYI, "historian" David Irvine is just as full of crap as this guy and deserves no more respect for his scholarship on this subject. He did some interesting scholarship early in his career, but now he just makes stuff up to get attention and doesn't even try to support his claims.

"I don't see any reason to be tasteful about Auschwitz. It's baloney, it's a legend. Once we admit the fact that it was a brutal slave labour camp and large numbers of people did die, as large numbers of innocent people died elsewhere in the war, why believe the rest of the baloney?" Irving said.

He added, "I say quite tastelessly, in fact, that more women died on the back seat of Edward Kennedy's car at Chappaquiddick than ever died in a gas chamber in Auschwitz."

He went on, "Oh, you think that's tasteless, how about this? There are so many Auschwitz survivors going around, in fact the number increases as the years go past, which is biologically very odd to say the least. Because I'm going to form an Association of Auschwitz survivors, survivors of the Holocaust and other liars, or the ASSHOLS."

With that said, I am a free speech guy, and I am horrified by this thought crime sentence. I understand that Germany is attempting to deal with a huge amount of national guilt which makes them overreact to stuff, but it is never a good idea to limit freedom of speech except by necessary time, place and manner restrictions.

The best antidote to false speech is true speech.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Just make Holocaust deniers spend one night night at Dachu and see how they feel after that

[Sisyphus]

The best antidote to false speech is true speech.

This isn't about false speech. It's about intimidation and the spreading of an antisemitic conspiracy theory that over the years has lead directly to violence, time and time again.

[JMS]

This goes a lot further than 'thought crimes' or the 'right to free speech'. This is not some academic calculating that the number of Jews being exterminated may not have been 6 million but 'only' 5.5 million or some lower number.

Holocaust denial has been used to enable fascism and a neo-Nazi agenda. People who are prosecuted are because they are promoting a conspiracy theory that is used to intimidate and leads directly to hate crimes against Jews and minorities.

Cross-burning with the intent of intimidating someone is illegal in Virginia. Is that a simple free speech issue too?

No it really is thought crime. And thought crime isn't a small problem. When you drag an author out of a book signing and throw him in jail for 5 years it's not the same as outlawing burning a cross on someone's front porch. Even though both events might express the same hateful beliefs. A book no matter how rehensible should never be outlawed or burned. A though or words should not be outlawed and the owner of those words jailed. To repress objectionable speach is only to shelter it from reason and allow those beliefs to fester and spread.

That's why we let the Klan march through the streets in Washington DC whenever they apply for a permit. Not because we agree with their ideas. But because to outlaw those morons would only help them recruit. Let everybody hear their ideas and let everybody hear the objections to their ideas.

[PleaseBlitz]

I'd like to see what the 14 charges actually were. I dont think denying the holocaust deserves JAIL (though i have no sympathy for this douche), i do think "inciting hatred" probably does. Thats what he was charged with, "inciting hatred."

The article needs to be more specific.

Anyways, if he knew the law and broke it anyways, ****em. Lock him up.

[headexplode]

I'm against thought crimes. I think these holocost deniers with their "new evidence" should be free to make their case in bars, on the internet and even and especially in institutes of higher learning. They should also be free to beable to convince all the folk they can, and free to assemble the most convincing argument they can. Outlawing thought is always counter productive.

Facts are there are millions of documents and tens of thousands of recorded first hand witnesses which would flatten any of there "evidence". It is impossible to disprove reality. There is no lack of motivated people to confront this "new scientific evidence", or any holocost deniers. Any such "new evidence" which comes to light would certainly be exposed as stupid or outwrite manufactured dribble when faced with the overwhelming documentation avalible. What worry's me is when the offensive thought/speach is outlawed with no forum to be expressed, examined and countered. When forced underground it is denied the confrontation with the overwhelming evidence which would disprove it. That buffer creates the safe haven for the falsehoods to grow, fester and challenge historical fact.

These Holocost deniers are not that uncommon today. One such "believer" accosted Ellie Weizel out in San Fransisco last week. Physically assaulted a Nobel Peace Prize winner. Tried to force the old man into a hotel room for who knows what. Jail should be reserved for guys like that who take their "concepts" to the next level.

You can't both jail the messenger, and effectively fight the message...

just my opinion...

I think you're dead on, here.

If you could jail anyone for being a crazy idiot, prisons would be far more overpopulated than they already are. Hell, if Mel Gibson was a german citizen, he could go to jail (now that I would support). But the point is, unless someone or some group is physically intimidating or threatening some other person or group, simply stating an opinion and trying to express that opinion is not grounds for jailing.

Sisyphus, I believe cross-burning on peoples' lawns or outside their houses or places of worship should be illegal, per my standards above, where that act is specifically intimidating or threatening. However, I don't believe it should be illegal if they do it at a Klan rally, where it's simply an expression of a belief or ideal, no matter how heinous or insidious.

Germany is germany and they can do what they want, though. I mean, they can jail you there for not recycling, so . . .

[H-O-G]

If its a crime in Germany than whats the problem?

[Predicto]

This isn't about false speech. It's about intimidation and the spreading of an antisemitic conspiracy theory that over the years has lead directly to violence, time and time again.

I don't agree. The connection is too removed.

If the guy was making a speech in front of a big crowd of neo-Nazis with the goal of getting them to burn the synagogue down the street, you would be correct, because that would be incitement to violence.

Otherwise, you are just taking the Red China approach to free speech - Speech is free as long as the government doesn't disagree with the message.

[Predicto]

If its a crime in Germany than whats the problem?

Legally, you are correct. We just don't think it should be a crime.

[Midnight Judges]

No it really is thought crime. And thought crime isn't a small problem. When you drag an author out of a book signing and throw him in jail for 5 years it's not the same as outlawing burning a cross on someone's front porch. Even though both events might express the same hateful beliefs. A book no matter how rehensible should never be outlawed or burned. A though or words should not be outlawed and the owner of those words jailed. To repress objectionable speach is only to shelter it from reason and allow those beliefs to fester and spread.

That's why we let the Klan march through the streets in Washington DC whenever they apply for a permit. Not because we agree with their ideas. But because to outlaw those morons would only help them recruit. Let everybody hear their ideas and let everybody hear the objections to their ideas.

...but the Klan never took over the country and committed genocide leading to one of the most bloody wars in the history of the world. If they had, our laws against them would certainly reflect it. This guy is deliberately laying down the foundation for future violence in a society that has been proven susceptable. I do believe speech is a sacred right, but so is life, and in this most extreme of circumstances, a little balance is in order.