Can a historian conduct a research doubting the Holocaust? (Roman, Hitler, Ireland)

[The Global]

Originally Posted by Three Wolves In Snow

Only if he never wanted to be taken seriously ever again in his entire life. About anything.

And this is my opinion by the way. I don't deny the holocaust. I know it happened, and there were millions of Jews who suffered from it. What I'm against is: to jail anyone who deny anything wither it's historically or scientifically. people free to agree or disagree with the mainstream, no one should be persecuted because of the denying of evolution, God, Holocaust or big bang, however, I agree that this person shouldn't be a teacher till not to spoil some other brains.

[The Global]

Originally Posted by jtur88

Salient to the specific question, it is my understanding that in Germany, it is illegal to even publicly state the opinion that further research could shed some doubt on the legitimacy or authenticity of the data that is currently held to be absolute.

Does this match with freedom of speech?

Criminalizing doubt is hardly an avenue to enlightenment

[The Global]

Originally Posted by Grandstander

Is that your only concern here? Academic freedom?

No, my concern is Freedom of speech.

You have no sort of grudge of any kind against Jews?

Of course not, neither Jews nor any other people.

Are you a supporter of Israel or an enemy of Israel?

What kind of question this one. Suppose I'm a Palestinian "I'm not" what should my answer be?

Establish first that you are neutral

How?

[findly185]

Originally Posted by The Global

If he were in a university in Germany or Austria NOW? Could he do? And what would the responses be to that? Just curious.

There are tons of doctors doing work in holocaust conspiracy theories. Most of them are in the US. There are a few youtube videos demonstrating their findings. Its fascinating stuff. There are always doubters for every historical event of any significance (9/11) etc.

IMO you cant be properly informed about anything unless you are well versed in every single side of a story/event.

[karen_in_nh_2012]

Originally Posted by The Global

Relax Karen. Why are you angry? Did there anyone mistakenly step on your tail?

Because we just had another thread on this. Do you know how to use the "search" function?

And if you are only interested in "freedom of speech," why use the Holocaust as your "example"?

Your post would be irritating to anyone with a working brain.

[The Global]

Originally Posted by karen_in_nh_2012

if you are only interested in "freedom of speech," why use the Holocaust as your "example"?

Give me yours.

Your post would be irritating to anyone with a working brain

Then, why are you irritating?

[karen_in_nh_2012]

Again, why use the Holocaust as your example if you are only interested in "freedom of speech"? Funny that you didn't answer that.

I will ignore your rudeness. Yes, I was rude too, but it's because these threads are so irritating. If you are a Holocaust denier, just say so. We DO have freedom of speech in this country and you can deny the Holocaust all you want (although you will come across as an idiot). Some countries, because of their particular history with this particular issue, do not allow people "freedom of speech" to deny something that the countries themselves have acknowledged.

You might try posting in the Europe forum, although many there will likely be just as irritated by your post as I was.

Yes, many of us hate threads that sound like they are written by Holocaust deniers. (And for the record, I am not Jewish.)

[The Global]

Originally Posted by karen_in_nh_2012

Yes, I was rude

Then you don't deserve an answer.

[ovcatto]

Originally Posted by The Global

No, my concern is Freedom of speech.

Contrary to popular belief, freedom of speech is not a god given right so it is left to men to determine what freedoms there are and the extent in which they can be exercised. And as Justice Scalia succinctly pointed out in the Heller vs District of Columbia no right is limitless.


As for you question:

Austria

§ 3h. As an amendment to § 3 g., whoever denies, grossly plays down, approves or tries to excuse the National Socialist genocide or other National Socialist crimes against humanity in a print publication, in broadcast or other media.[17]

Belgium

Article 1 Whoever, in the circumstances given in article 444 of the Penal Code denies, grossly minimises, attempts to justify, or approves the genocide committed by the German National Socialist Regime during the Second World War shall be punished by a prison sentence of eight days to one year, and by a fine of twenty six francs to five thousand francs.

Czech Republic

§ 261a The person who publicly denies, puts in doubt, approves or tries to justify nazi or communist genocide or other crimes of nazis or communists will be punished by prison of 6 months to 3 years.[22]

France

Art 9. – As an amendment to Article 24 of the law of July 29, 1881 on the freedom of the press, article 24 (a) is as follows written: <<Art. 24 (a). - those who have disputed the existence of one or more crimes against humanity such as they are defined by Article 6 of the statute of the international tribunal military annexed in the agreement of London of August 8, 1945 and which were a carried out either by the members of an organization declared criminal pursuant to Article 9 of the aforementioned statute, or by a person found guilty such crimes by a French or international jurisdiction shall be punished by one month to one years imprisonment or a fine.

Art 13. - It is inserted, after article 48-1 of the law of July 29, 1881 on the freedom of the press, article 48-2 thus written: <<Art. 48-2. - publication or publicly expressed opinion encouraging those to whom it is addressed to pass a favourable moral judgment on one or more crimes against humanity and tending to justify these crimes (including collaboration) or vindicate their perpetrators shall be punished by one to five years imprisonment or a fine.[24]


Germany

(3) Whoever publicly or in a meeting approves of, denies or belittles an act committed under the rule of National Socialism of the type indicated in Section 6 subsection (1) of the Code of Crimes against International Law, in a manner capable of disturbing the public peace shall be punished with imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine.

(4) Whoever publicly or in a meeting disturbs the public peace in a manner that assaults the human dignity of the victims by approving of, denying or rendering harmless the violent and arbitrary National Socialist rule shall be punished with imprisonment for not more than three years or a fine.

The European Union

Publicly condoning, denying or grossly trivialising
- crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes as defined in the Statute of the International Criminal Court (Articles 6, 7 and 8) directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin, and
- crimes defined by the Tribunal of Nuremberg (Article 6 of the Charter of the International Military Tribunal, London Agreement of 1945) directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_ag...locaust_denial

[Mistermobile]

Originally Posted by The Global

If he were in a university in Germany or Austria NOW? Could he do? And what would the responses be to that? Just curious.

No one can prove a negative. I could never prove that I did not do an act because it if you are right it never happened, something else happened; its like a paradox. Or as Peter Fonda said, "Everybody has to be someplace, every minute."

Would the six million + missing Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, elderly, mental defectives, non-Ayrians, enemies of the State and children please call the operator.