- The struggle for freedom of speech continues in Germany
and Europe.
-
- Sylvia Stolz, the courageous lawyer for Ernst Zundel.
has now been charged by the German government with "denying the Holocaust."
-
- The German government's efforts to repress freedom of
speech, opinion, and conscience have reached new depths. In Germany, expressing
any disagreement with any aspect of the officially-sanctioned Holocaust
story is punishable by imprisonment. Last month Ernst Zundel, a non-violent
67 year old resident of Canada and the United States, was sentenced to
five years in prison for simply expressing opinions that differ with the
"official position" of prominent Jewish Holocaust promoters and
the German government. Such imprisonment is of course a mockery of the
principle of the "free speech" claimed by Europe and the United
States.
-
- The Associated Press reported:
-
- Prosecutors said they are seeking a ban on Stolz working
as a lawyer. "This foreign occupation seems threatened and insulted,"
Stolz said. "So telling the truth is prosecuted for slander and the
people who speak the truth are silenced, whether they're attorneys, doctors,
engineers or any other profession."
-
- In Germany, not only have authorities imprisoned thousands
for expressing their opinions, they are also acting to deny the fundamental
rights of the accused.
-
- One of the founding principles of human rights in the
West is that an accused person has the right to full legal defense. If
a lawyer can be charged with a crime and imprisoned for simply defending
his client, one more pillar of human rights has fallen. Defense attorneys
have been charged with the crime of "Holocaust denial" by simply
arguing that the opinions of their clients are based on evidence that shows
their clients did not "defame" or "incite" but simply
stated historical truth.
-
- In Germany, defendants on trial for challenging aspects
of the popular version of the Holocaust are not allowed to present evidence
showing that their respective opinions are in fact truthful. Whether or
not the Holocaust occurred as it is popularly presented, free speech advocates
argue that denial of defendants and their lawyers the right to defend the
factual basis of their client's assertions, suggests that their evidence
is so convincing that authorities must suppress them.
-
- The courageous woman lawyer, Sylvia Stolz, who defended
Ernst Zundel, has now herself been charged with "Holocaust denial"
for simply defending her client by attempting to show that her client's
specific assertions were truthful and accurate.
-
- Even in the heresy trials of the Inquisition, held up
as the ultimate in oppression of human rights and freedom, attorneys did
not face imprisonment for defending their heliocentric clients.
-
- Such actions by Germany are meant not only to punish
men such as Ernst Zundel for their heretical and blasphemous opinions,
but to create a climate where defense attorneys themselves cannot defend
their clients adequately. How will the accused find adequate defense attorneys
if the lawyers themselves might face imprisonment for simply asserting
their clients innocence?
-
- Ernst Zundel is the most important political prisoner
in the Western World. His imprisonment along with men such as Gemar Rudolf
and thousands of others are testimony to the fact that free speech, thought
and expression in parts of Europe is a lie. It also shows the moral hypocrisy
and evil of a mass media that forever touts freedom of speech and expression,
but does not rise up in moral outrage at this abject denial of the most
basic of human rights, freedom of speech.
-
- Freedom of speech only has meaning when unpopular ideas
are allowed.
-
- Popular opinions need no principles of free speech and
expression.
-
- If not, then the most repressive regimes in history could
be said to allow free speech.
-
- -David Duke
-
- http://www.davidduke.com/general/1946_1946.html
|
