Deny Armenian Holocaust, Get a Year in Prison

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bravo

Socialitest
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
5,336
Reaction score
1,446
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans serif][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans serif] The French Parliament on thursday adopted a controversial law introducing imprisonment and monetary fines to anyone denying the genocide of Armenians by Ottomon Turks in the early 20th century. ...[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans serif] Although it still needs to be examined by the Senate before being enforced, the law foresees prison terms of up to 1 year and fines of up to 45,000 Euro for the denial of the Armenian genocide.[/FONT][/FONT]

http://www.bianet.org/2006/10/01_eng/news86492.htm

is it really logical to campaign for free speech, as france repeatedly does, and then pass a law that carries a year imprisonment for denying a disputed historical event?

whether or not the genocide occurred (it very well mightve been), i just dont understand how some countries have laws that stifle discourse, but still claim to be a beacon for freedom.

what say you? are there certain historical events so sacred that any1 denying them deserves imprisonment?

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans serif][/FONT][/FONT]
 

blacbird

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
36,987
Reaction score
6,158
Location
The right earlobe of North America
In Turkey, you can get serious prison time for affirming the Armenian Holocaust. Since Turkey wants to join the EU, discussions between the Turks and the French ought to be pretty amusing.

caw.
 

bloemmarc

Fantasy writer
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 11, 2005
Messages
526
Reaction score
21
Then are they condemning the words of the phycho from Iran.
 

Bravo

Socialitest
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
5,336
Reaction score
1,446
blacbird said:
In Turkey, you can get serious prison time for affirming the Armenian Holocaust. Since Turkey wants to join the EU, discussions between the Turks and the French ought to be pretty amusing.

caw.

good point and something they should fix.

but i dont recall turkey lecturing on free speech.
 

Forbidden Snowflake

I'm quite put out.
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 16, 2006
Messages
2,026
Reaction score
340
Age
40
Location
UK
Website
www.vinjii.ch
I think it's as much a crime to say a horrible crime has never happened as actually committing the crime.

So, I agree with Europe about prosecuting Holocaust deniers.

But if the Armenian Holocaust is disputed (I didn't know it was), then that's wrong.
 

Bravo

Socialitest
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
5,336
Reaction score
1,446
blacbird said:
Not really. Only in Turkey.

caw.


i dont really even see why turkey is so adamant about it. it occurred before the nation was even born, during the last years of the ottomon empire.

they really shouldnt be blamed for the sins of a decaying government.

but i dont think its fair to act as if there is only one side to it either. the armenians w/in the ottomon empire sided w/ the russians at the height of WWI.

that is not the same thing as civilians massacred during WWII b/c they were jew, gypsie, or "undesirable".
 

SC Harrison

Dances With Hamsters
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 15, 2005
Messages
3,351
Reaction score
968
Location
Mid-life Crisisland
Website
www.freewebs.com
Bravo said:
but i dont think its fair to act as if there is only one side to it either. the armenians w/in the ottomon empire sided w/ the russians at the height of WWI.

that is not the same thing as civilians massacred during WWII b/c they were jew, gypsie, or "undesirable".

Regardless of acts committed during war (or peace, for that matter), when a group is targeted for forceful relocation and execution based on ethnicity, it is genocide, period. There are no possible mitigating factors in this equation, but we always try to figure out the why, even while innocents are dying.
 

Bravo

Socialitest
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
5,336
Reaction score
1,446
Forbidden Snowflake said:
I think it's as much a crime to say a horrible crime has never happened as actually committing the crime.

there's no way you actually believe that.
 

kikazaru

Benefactor Member
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
2,142
Reaction score
433
The right of free speech is a cornerstone of civilized society, yet there is also such a thing as abusing the privilege. Genocides are an atrocity committed not only against one particular group of people, but against humanity. To deliberately spread lies, to deliberately ignore facts, is to deliberately spread hate. Society then has to weigh the right of one person's individual right to spread hate and perhaps cause social unrest, under the guise of free speech, against the rights of the rest of the population to live peacefully.

There are libel and slander laws in place and used against writers who tell verifiable falsehoods against individuals, I don't think that this is much different. By denying the holocaust, it not only is a slap in the face to those who lost relatives in it, it dehumanizes the dead, and then minimizes the importance of such event for all of humanity.
 

Forbidden Snowflake

I'm quite put out.
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 16, 2006
Messages
2,026
Reaction score
340
Age
40
Location
UK
Website
www.vinjii.ch
Bravo said:
there's no way you actually believe that.

Oh, Bravo, you should be able to see in what way I mean it.

I will quote kikazaru:

There are libel and slander laws in place and used against writers who tell verifiable falsehoods against individuals, I don't think that this is much different. By denying the holocaust, it not only is a slap in the face to those who lost relatives in it, it dehumanizes the dead, and then minimizes the importance of such event for all of humanity.

I find that horrible. And in a certain way just as horrible as the crime itself. It lacks every respect, every bit of humanity, it takes away the last shred of dignity. And that is horrifying.

Of course the crime itself is worst. I hope you get what I mean.
 

Bravo

Socialitest
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
5,336
Reaction score
1,446
Forbidden Snowflake said:
Of course the crime itself is worst. I hope you get what I mean.

i do now.

thank you
 

SC Harrison

Dances With Hamsters
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 15, 2005
Messages
3,351
Reaction score
968
Location
Mid-life Crisisland
Website
www.freewebs.com
If we allow ourselves to forget these horrors, we will be less likely to recognize future horrors when they happen.

From that perspective, someone who denies a past genocide could be facilitating a future one, so I don't see this as a straight-up freedom of speech issue.
 

English Dave

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 29, 2006
Messages
1,230
Reaction score
181
I always think it is dangerous for Governments to decide what can and can't be spoken about.

However in the UK I think it is possibly as balanced as it could be under the circumstances.

For example we have no 'holocaust denial' law. But we do have laws against incitement to racial or religious hatred.

The key word is incitement. You can have any opinion you like and say it to who you like but if it appears that the circumstances are such that these views are designed to create hatred then you can be arrested.

Of course then there is the problem of who makes that decision. But that's another thread! :)
 

Bravo

Socialitest
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
5,336
Reaction score
1,446
SC Harrison said:
If we allow ourselves to forget these horrors, we will be less likely to recognize future horrors when they happen.

From that perspective, someone who denies a past genocide could be facilitating a future one, so I don't see this as a straight-up freedom of speech issue.

which might make sense idealistically, but it's really just grandstanding.

how many genocides have we let happen after the Nazis? how many times have we said since then: "never again".

it's really kind of pathetic, in all honesty, and its just this clever way of pretending as if we're somehow more enlightened and humane than the rest of the world. it helps us sleep at night knowing that we condemned those atrocities of yesteryear.

yeah, well what about sudan? what about congo? or chechnya?right here right now, what's being done about that?

what happened with rwanda or bosnia or guatamela?

and on and on and on.

and maybe 20 years from now, some enlightened western nation will show the world that it condemned those atrocities....while ignoring the genocide happening right then and there - not to mention actually arming and funding the aggressor.


:Shrug:
 
Last edited:

English Dave

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 29, 2006
Messages
1,230
Reaction score
181
Bravo said:
and maybe 20 years from now, some enlightened western nation will show the world that it condemned those atrocities....while ignoring the genocide happening right then and there - not to mention actually arming and funding the aggressor.


:Shrug:
Or an Arab nation?

C'mon Bravo.
 

Bravo

Socialitest
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
5,336
Reaction score
1,446
English Dave said:
Or an Arab nation?

C'mon Bravo.

huh?

i honestly dont see what youre getting at.

are you really comparing our standards of free speech and/or our position on human rights w/ the arab world?

youll have to clarify.

but im just tired of this patronizing notion where we should go teach the world how to become like us, while conveniently excusing the genocides we ourselves have commited.

only in france can they say brutally killing 1.5m algerians was just a "mistake" but then still claim to be a champion of human rights. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

English Dave

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 29, 2006
Messages
1,230
Reaction score
181
No. I'm saying the repression of free speech is generally a bad thing. Because most Western democracies have the power of the vote. Something that depends on free speech. When anyone dictates free speech is what I say it is, that is no longer democracy.

Something that I personally think is somewhat lacking in much of the Arab world.

I'm not really for 'Vote for me or I'll kill you'
 

Bravo

Socialitest
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
5,336
Reaction score
1,446
i was wrong.
france never even said it was a mistake (i thought i saw that before). how's this for hypocrisy, re: algeria:
However France has never accepted its responsibility in tortures and massacres in Algeria. Paris says that the past should be left to historians.
French President Jacques Chirac, upon harsh reactions to the law encouraging the good sides of the French colonial history, made the statement, "Writing history is the job of the historians, not of the laws." Writing history is the job of the historians" According to Prime Minister, Dominique de Villepin, "speaking about the past or writing history is not the job of the parliament."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accusations_of_French_genocide_against_Algerians

ED said:
No. I'm saying the repression of free speech is generally a bad thing. Because most Western democracies have the power of the vote. Something that depends on free speech. When anyone dictates free speech is what I say it is, that is no longer democracy.
Something that I personally think is somewhat lacking in much of the Arab world.
okay. and i agree w your earlier statement that there can be laws against incitement. i just dont see the relevance for bringing up arab nations here.
im talking specifically about 2 things:
1) freedom of speech w/ regards to history
2) and the west's patronizing tone to the 3rd world while denying it's own atrocities and it's role in the atrocities happening right here and now.


but hey. at least i can openly complain about these things.


we still got that, right? even w/ the patriot act...?
 
Last edited:

English Dave

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 29, 2006
Messages
1,230
Reaction score
181
Bravo said:
i
okay. and i agree w your earlier statement that there can be laws against incitement. i just dont see the relevance for bringing up arab nations here.
im talking specifically about 2 things:
1) freedom of speech w/ regards to history
2) and the west's patronizing tone to the 3rd world while denying it's own atrocities and it's role in the atrocities happening right here and now.
but hey. at least i can openly complain about these things.
we still got that, right? even w/ the patriot act...right?


Because Number 2 [he he he] you are confusing or deliberately obfuscating a conflict between The West and Islam. Something I've never seen you do to this point?
 

Bravo

Socialitest
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
5,336
Reaction score
1,446
English Dave said:
Because Number 2 [he he he] you are confusing or deliberately obfuscating a conflict between The West and Islam. Something I've never seen you do to this point?

nope. youre reading too much into this.

i never used to make fun of france, but every once in awhile, i cant help but laugh at their blatant hypocrisy.

as an englishman, im sure you understand where im coming from. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.