You don't post much. But when you do....BOOOM!harleycharley said:bad fashion sense.....
I agree that you should be free to believe what you like. I think he crossed the line because certain of his actions were deemed to be counselling others and inciting violence. Just like crying "FIRE" in a crowded room gets you into trouble because your actions caused forseeable harm.Coach said:While I do not agreee with his thoughts at all, should he be arrested? Isn't the freedom to believe something we support in this country. Should we ship all "racist asses" out of the country? Do we then arrest everyone with extremist or "objectionable opinions".
WE know the Holacost took place and was arguably one of the worst events to happen in the history of man, no argument. But is it illegal for him, or for anyone to believe it didn't take place? So what if he preaches this? Of course he is wrong, but what exactly is his crime?
If we arrest those who promote and teach falsehoods then, taken to the extreme, shouldn't we arrest all those who teach that Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny exist? I know this sound silly, but think about it.
Coach said:If we arrest those who promote and teach falsehoods then, taken to the extreme, shouldn't we arrest all those who teach that Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny exist? I know this sound silly, but think about it.
slowpoke said:I think he crossed the line because certain of his actions were deemed to be counselling others and inciting violence.
I haven't the foggiest idea WTF you are blathering about.Peeping Tom said:That line of reasoning worked wonders in the soviet empire, 65 million dead, well nobody is perfect ...
It seems to me that these days "politically correct" is anything in line with the views of the right. Moreover, if anyone's being blacklisted or in danger of being muzzled in the U.S. these days it's because they have the audacity to call into question the dominant political philosophy of the Bush regime and the religious right.Peeping Tom said:Just give the left a little more time, they are working fervently ...
Correct, sir.yychobbyist said:It seems to me that these days "politically correct" is anything in line with the views of the right. Moreover, if anyone's being blacklisted or in danger of being muzzled in the U.S. these days it's because they have the audacity to call into question the dominant political philosophy of the Bush regime and the religious right.
I can't disagree with what you've said but it is noteworthy that Zundel was allowed to remain in Canada for over 40 years and they tried every means at their disposal to convict him fair and square (for distributing hate literature via his web site). But the charges were overturned on technicalities and the law was eventually ruled unconstitutional. Finally he moved to the US, vowing never to set foot in Canada again. But the US sent him back to us after a few years because he violated the terms of his residency there. So he's wanted for hate violations in Germany, unfit to remain in the US and now Canada finally gets to use immigration measures rather than to continue expensively prosecuting him.Drunken Master said:Correct, sir.
Case in point - when the Republican governor of Colorado was making a case for firing William Chruchill, he claimed that Churchill was supposedly spouting "hate speech"...
I will say this, though - I find the deportation of Zundel to be fishy in the extreme. That he promoted "hate speech" is beyond question - but the use of security certificates to detain him and using "national security" as a reason to deport him - this crosses a line between legitimately controlling dangerous speech (and we should always construe "dangerous speech" very, very narrowly) and using the powers of state to steamroll over the rights of an individual - however retarded that individual may be.
And Germany's hate laws are a lot stronger than ours.slowpoke said:... So he's wanted for hate violations in Germany, unfit to remain in the US and now Canada finally gets to use immigration measures rather than to continue expensively prosecuting him.
He'd never gained Canadian citizenship so, when he returned from the US, he was just one of a great many refugees. After all the $$$ we've spent trying to get rid of this stain on humanity, do you really think we should have let him back in just so we could go back to trying him in court? I'm glad we finally found a way to get rid of him and I hope we'd do the same to any other refugee with such a bogus reason to be fleeing his homeland.