By David Duke. The United States and the EU have expressed shock at the murder of the Armenian Turkish journalist Hrant Dink.
I am surprised that they are shocked. The fact is that major EU member states such as France and Germany support intolerance of intellectually dissident viewpoints, a climate of intolerance that can lead to the imprisonment and even murder of free speech advocates.
Political Leaders in the United States and in the E.U. have supported the idea that freedom of speech should not be allowed for what they call “offensive speech.” In reality, the “offensive speech” they refer to is not speech related to obscenity or advocacy of violence, but simply dissident speech of an intellectual manner against the establishment point of view. In Turkey, “hate speech” is saying a Holocaust did happen (the Armenian genocide). In Europe it is saying that a Holocaust didn’t (being a quote “Holocaust denier” is defined as simply questioning any part of the officially sanctioned Second World War “Holocaust” story”).
Recently, a member of the European Parliament from France, Dr. Bruno Gollnisch, was sentenced to three months in prison (suspended), not for arguing against any part of the Holocaust story, but for simply saying that he believes that historians should debate and decide the matter. He was also fined 5000 Euros and will made to pay an additional 60,000 Euros to publicize his conviction.
Here are some direct quotes from the European news stories on Gollnisch:
‘Gollnisch was charged over his comments at a press conference last year which trod a fine line on the edge of French laws against calling into question crimes against humanity.
…Speaking in Lyon, France, in October 2004, Gollnisch said: “I do not deny the existence of deadly gas chambers. But I’m not a specialist on this issue, and I think we have to let the historians debate it.”
He did not contest the “hundreds of thousands, the millions of deaths” during the Holocaust, but added: “As to the way those people died, a debate should take place.”…
“Historians have the right to discuss the number of deaths and the way that they died. Fifty years after the facts we can discuss the real number of deaths,” Gollnisch was quoted as saying at the time.
He also said that the “existence of the gas chambers is for historians to discuss.”
Dr. Gollnisch said in a statement that he would appeal against Thursday’s verdict. “This scandal goes beyond my personal case in a country that is otherwise the most advanced in the world in the area of freedom of expression,” he said.
The conviction of EU Parliamentarian Gollnisch by such modern day courts of inquisition show how the “Holocaust” with a capital “H” has assumed the dimension of a state religion. He was convicted for essentially saying he personally doesn’t know the ultimate realities of the Holocaust; not for refuting any aspect of the official Holocaust. He was convicted because he doesn’t have a religious-like belief in Holocaust. That is an important distinction. In fact, he was even quoted as saying he believes in the existence of gas chambers and the deaths of millions, but that historians should be allowed debate the issue. For simply saying this he was made to pay 65,000 Euros and sentenced to a suspended prison sentence of three months. Others have spent years in prison in Europe for the same offense.
Because the suppression, intimidation and punishment of Holocaust denial is so important to the Jewish extremists, they support a law in France making it illegal to refute the alleged Armenian genocide that occurred in Turkey during the First World War. By doing so they sought to have the appearance of even-handedness. This is ironic because the Jewish state has consitently downplayed and “denied” the Armenian Genocide because they don’t don’t want any Holocaust Gods before Thee! In America where is there is no Jewish Holocaust law to uphold, the organized Jewish community has worked hard to prevent recognition of it by congress.
The Armenian-Turkish journalist, Hrant Dink, a man who certainly believed that an Armenian genocide occurred n Turkey, opposed the French measure because he said he believed in freedom of speech and press. He also said would have been first to travel to Paris to violate the law if it passed.
Turkish intellectuals reject French decision
But it’s the democratic forces that have been fighting to defend freedom of expression in Turkey for years who have been most damaged by the bill. These groups have long tried to raise public awareness of the mass killings of Armenians, and the fact that freedom of expression will now be curbed in France creates a paradoxical situation for these groups. “How are we supposed to argue against laws that prohibit us from talking about genocide, when France is now doing exactly the same, just the other way round?” asks Hrant Dink, one of Istanbul’s most prominent Armenian intellectuals. “It’s completely irrational.”
Dink is editor-in-chief of the Turkish-Armenian weekly Agos, which has tried in recent years to promote a public debate on Turkish crimes against the Armenians. Along with other Turkish and Turkish-Armenian intellectuals, Dink organized a conference on the Armenian question in Istanbul last year. It was the first time that the official version of Turkish history was publicly debated in Turkey. “If this law goes into effect, I’ll be the first to travel to Paris to violate it,” says Dink.
Mr. Dink was assassinated by men who believe it is morally right to murder people who speak ideas that they find to be reprehensible or offensive. It is the same principle of many states of Europe in that they believe it is morally right to threaten, imprison, bankrupt and harm those who they say have “offensive” opinions.
David Irving, Gemar Rudolf, Juergen Graf, Ernst Zundel, Bruno Gollnisch and a host of others have had their human rights violated by men who believe it is morally just to imprison and punish men for their opinions.
The assassination of Hrant Dink was done in the same spirit as the so-called “Holocaust Denial” laws in Europe.
This hateful spirit is shown by the European and American condemnation of the “Holocaust Conference” recently held in Tehran. There were a host of media lies about the Tehran Conference. It was not offered to refute the Holocaust, but to offer freedom of speech, and make available a free forum where the issue could be discussed and debated. And in fact, there were debates, often heated, between participants. I can easily expose the climate of lies by showing how the media alleged that I gave a speech denying the gas chambers, when the text and even a recording of the speech shows that I specifically mentioned in my talk that I will not refute any allegations of the Holocaust, but that I was there to defend freedom of speech on the issue.
The conference was branded as a “disgrace to humanity.” Yet, at the same time the conference was held in Tehran there were thousands of people imprisoned, intimidated, harassed, and driven to financial ruin in Europe for simply expressing their opinion. It was a “disgrace” to offer free speech on the Holocaust issue, but somehow it is not a disgrace to imprison people, even some elderly people in their 80’s in Europe for expressing their opinion.
No protests from the United States State Department have been sent to European nations who deny the human rights of people who dare to not believe in what can now be described as the new Holocaust religion. No protests were sent to countries who imprison people for simply saying their should be free speech and debate on the Holocaust.
The United States and Europe has no right to be shocked at the murder of Hrant Dink, if anything, the governments of the United States and of Europe, as well as the Jewish-extremist influenced international media, are partially guilty for the murder. By their actions, they have told the world that it is OK to deny the human rights of those who present “reprehensible” or “offensive” ideas.
The United States and Europe’s leaders should demand freedom for Europe’s political prisoners — freedom for it’s Holocaust “heretics.”
The message sent to the world should be very, very clear:
That denial of human rights, whether a human being suffers loss of life, sustenance, or freedom — is morally wrong.
That freedom of Speech is the cornerstone of all human rights, for it is the only way we even know whether rights are respected or not.
Freedom must prevail.
Hopefully, the tragic murder of Hrant Dink will have the opposite affect intended by his assassins: that freedom of speech is an inalienable right.
Anyone, or any government that impinges on that right is guilty of a crime against humanity.
–David Duke
