I guess that makes sense.

> Because the Austrian people, through a democratic process, decided
> that this very particular bit of speech is so unacceptable to them
> (and potentially dangerous), that they agreed to suspend the rights of
> free speech just for this one item.
>
> They have a much better perspective their than I have here of exactly
> what the holocaust actually meant.
>
> Notice that this has NOTHING to do with freedom of the press. It has
> to do with freedom of speech. It is not that this idjit published a
> book in Britain denying the holocaust. It is that he traveled to
> Austria and spoke to a crowd denying the holocaust. Which under
> Austrian law is illegal.
>
> According to the people that drafted and sponsored this law, they
> equate it to forbidding someone yelling fire in a crowded theater.
>
> Again from my perspective, distant in time and location, it seems a
> bit extreme, but they don't.
>
> On 3/2/06, G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I think i kind of agree...which sucks, I hate agreeing with Gel.
>>
>> Saying the holocaust never happened should result in scorn, ridicule, and
>> isolation. Not sure why it should include jail time though.
>
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:198545
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to