• German court bans sections of poem mocking Turkish president Erdogan
    73 replies, posted
if Germany is so against denying genocide, i wonder why they are trying to have good relations with Turkey
[QUOTE=bdd458;50350488]A Government official lying to go to war =/= a comedian saying dumb shit about a foreign countries president.[/QUOTE] So when Erdogan refuses to classify the murder of millions of Armenians as genocide that's also not covered in free speech, right? Then how is denying the Holocaust not? [editline]19th May 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=EdvardSchnitz;50350492]if Germany is so against denying genocide, i wonder why they are trying to have good relations with Turkey[/QUOTE] We just pissed them off by condemning the Armenian genocide.
[QUOTE=Killuah;50350496]So when Erdogan refuses to classify the murder of millions of Armenians as genocide that's also not covered in free speech, right? Then how is denying the Holocaust not?[/QUOTE] I'm saying your example has nothing to do with the current discussion. But no, it is covered under that - no matter how disgusting. And even then, if Rumsfeld were to be charged with anything (along with the other Neo-cons who were itching to fight Iraq 2.0) it wouldn't be for lying, unless it was under oath.
[QUOTE=bdd458;50350513]I'm saying your example has nothing to do with the current discussion. But no, it is covered under that - no matter how disgusting. And even then, if Rumsfeld were to be charged with anything (along with the other Neo-cons who were itching to foght Iraq 2.0) it wouldn't be for lying.[/QUOTE] I was reacting to [quote]There is no such danger to saying "the Holocaust is a myth". The only thing you're protecting by banning statements like that is people's feelings.[/quote] [editline]19th May 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=bdd458;50350513] But no, it is covered under that - no matter how disgusting. And even then, if Rumsfeld were to be charged with anything (along with the other Neo-cons who were itching to fight Iraq 2.0) it wouldn't be for lying, unless it was under oath.[/QUOTE] So making shit of for political gain is covered under free speech?
[QUOTE=Killuah;50350520]I was reacting to[/quote] Actively justifying a war in the now still doesn't equal denying a past event, no matter how disgusting and shameful that past event was. Rumsfeld actively helped start the Iraq War 2.0, Edrogan had no hand in actively causing the Armenian Genocide. It's a false equivalence. I think Edrogan is a disgusting being for denying the Armenian Genocide, and I think the US is retarded for going back on our previous statements and no longer referring to it as a Genocide to try to keep Turkey on our good side - but that I would certainly argued is protected. [QUOTE=Killuah;50350520]So making shit of for political gain is covered under free speech?[/QUOTE] Unethical for sure, but I'm not sure what laws (international or otherwise) he broke by using a false justification for war which is why I said that I don't think he'd be charged with lying. So unless someone shows me what laws he specifically broke by doing so, I'll consider him an unethical asshole who is protected. I could be wrong on that count since I'm not sure all the laws (international and domestic) surrounding justifying wars so there could be an international law about false justifications for wars (and thinking about it more, there probably is).
[QUOTE=uber.;50350489]Are you honestly comparing a car crash to the genocidal and systematic murder of 6 million jews? Jesus fucking Christ.[/QUOTE] Maybe there is a language barrier problem or something, but if that's what you take from reading my post then you're either being willfully ignorant of what I said or you can't read properly.
[QUOTE=bdd458;50350592]Actively justifying a war in the now still doesn't equal denying a past event, no matter how disgusting and shameful that past event was. Rumsfeld actively helped start the Iraq War 2.0, Edrogan had no hand in actively causing the Armenian Genocide. It's a false equivalence. I think Edrogan is a disgusting being for denying the Armenian Genocide, and I think the US is retarded for going back on our previous statements and no longer referring to it as a Genocide to try to keep Turkey on our good side - but that I would certainly argued is protected. [/QUOTE] It's both lies for a political goal. You obviously don't want to get what I am saying so I'll just stop here since I can't be bothered to search for laws that state that you can't make up shit to further your own goals. So whatevs. Have fun.
[QUOTE=Pantz Master;50350636]Maybe there is a language barrier problem or something, but if that's what you take from reading my post then you're either being willfully ignorant of what I said or you can't read properly.[/QUOTE] I'm sorry but you were the one asking "What can false statements about the holocaust do?" so maybe ignorance isn't one of the things you should accuse me of.
Wew, am I glad that I live in a country where it isn't forbidden to insult some Islamic wanna-be dictator who regularly imprisons journalists who are critical of him and delivers weapons to IS and is pretty much blackmailing the EU at the moment too while the EU allows this genocide-denying, terrorist-loving goatfucker with his Ottoman sultan delusions to trample all over their established values and morals like a bunch of spineless twats. According to Merkel and her cohorts at the EU, Erdogan is the kind of person that fits PERFECTLY into the EU as it stands right now, and thus, they roll out all the carpets and trumpets out for him, because heavens forbid that mister Erdogoat gets offended at people making fun of him, like the insecure mancunt he is.
[QUOTE=uber.;50350690]I'm sorry but you were the one asking "What can false statements about the holocaust do?" so maybe ignorance isn't one of the things you should accuse me of.[/QUOTE] Yes, I did ask that and I have yet to receive an answer.
There once was a man from Peru, Who dreamed he was eating his shoe. He woke with a fright, In the middle of the night, To find Erdogan likes to dress up in high heels and fiddle little boys.
[QUOTE=Jordax;50350731]Wew, am I glad that I live in a country where it isn't forbidden to insult some Islamic wanna-be dictator who regularly imprisons journalists who are critical of him and delivers weapons to IS and is pretty much blackmailing the EU at the moment too while the EU allows this genocide-denying, terrorist-loving goatfucker with his Ottoman sultan delusions to trample all over their established values and morals like a bunch of spineless twats. According to Merkel and her cohorts at the EU, Erdogan is the kind of person that fits PERFECTLY into the EU as it stands right now, and thus, they roll out all the carpets and trumpets out for him, because heavens forbid that mister Erdogoat gets offended at people making fun of him, like the insecure mancunt he is.[/QUOTE] Gregorius Nekschot got arrested in 2008 for blasphemy, and the corresponding law was abolished in 2014. The Dutch Criminal Code § 137 still criminalizes discriminatory speech: [quote]… deliberately giv[ing] public expression to views insulting to a group of persons on account of their race, religion, or conviction or sexual preference.[/quote] [url="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_by_country"]Freedom of speech is relative in pretty much every country.[/url] And in most cases, the legal code was put in place loooong before any of the politicians came to power. It's not like Merkel made up that piece of law specifically about insulting foreign heads of states because she liked Edogan so gosh-dang much. [url="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cf1fOtXW4AEF5Qd.jpg:large"]In fact, it's pretty common throughout Europe.[/url]
[QUOTE=Native Hunter;50349879]Yes because free speech is only free speech until someone's feelings are hurt[/QUOTE] 'My rights don't end where your feelings begin' does not mean making false, defamatory, or libelous/slanderous statements is a protected form of free speech. I doubt many people here really, truly believe that lying about someone to deliberately defame them is a legitimate form of free speech considering the responses I see when, for example, there's a story about someone spreading false rape allegations. If you maliciously spread false statements to harm someone, that's a crime in pretty much every country. There's a little more leeway with criticizing politicians but calling a head of state a sheepfucker and pedophile on national TV probably isn't covered.
[QUOTE=Pantz Master;50350184]Yes. You probably thought that was a gotcha question but nope. I don't know why so many Europeans think this should be illegal, or that Nazi paraphernalia should be banned, etc. Laws like that are 100% against free speech. There is no logical argument for keeping them on the books, unless you admit that you're sacrificing free speech. This and "hate speech" laws are areas where America is leaps and bounds ahead of Europe (and Canada for that matter, they have "hate speech" laws too). You should have no right [I]not[/I] to be offended. You should have every right to offend. [editline]19th May 2016[/editline] So banning ideas is the right way to combat it?[/QUOTE] But you can't openly claim that you plan to kill the president. How can you ever be truly free? And staying on-topic, defamation laws exist in USA too. You can't just publicly claim someone's a pedophile for no fucking reason. See the post above me.
[QUOTE=Bat-shit;50351300]But you can't openly claim that you plan to kill the president. How can you ever be truly free? And staying on-topic, defamation laws exist in USA too. You can't just publicly claim someone's a pedophile for no fucking reason. See the post above me.[/QUOTE] Do you not see the blatant differences between making specific violent threats and denying the Holocaust? And defamation laws do not carry criminal penalties in the US (at least federally, I can't speak to each individual state or municipality). You can't go to jail for saying stuff. It is also way harder to prove defamation, making situations like this unheard of in the US.
[QUOTE=uber.;50350142]Considering that anti-semitism is still going strong in multiple European countries that's pretty sad.[/QUOTE] Can we ban everything I disagree with while we're at it?
[QUOTE=Pantz Master;50350740]Yes, I did ask that and I have yet to receive an answer.[/QUOTE] I don't really see in a point in arguing with someone about something as basic as: "Why maybe you shouldn't deny the holocaust?" Ask a holocaust survivor. Or a history teacher. Usually this comes from just being a decent human being, honestly.
[QUOTE=catbarf;50351115]'My rights don't end where your feelings begin' does not mean making false, defamatory, or libelous/slanderous statements is a protected form of free speech. I doubt many people here really, truly believe that lying about someone to deliberately defame them is a legitimate form of free speech considering the responses I see when, for example, there's a story about someone spreading false rape allegations. If you maliciously spread false statements to harm someone, that's a crime in pretty much every country. There's a little more leeway with criticizing politicians but calling a head of state a sheepfucker and pedophile on national TV probably isn't covered.[/QUOTE]Context is everything, but sure, if a comedian is being a comedian and also doing it in a rude way then absolutely that is free speech. Saying "I have it on good authority that Erdogan does, indeed, fuck sheep and I'll present proof" and then making shit up isn't, it's arguably the one thing that keeps the fourth estate from doing whatever the fuck they want. There is a fine line that's sometimes difficult to see, and it's preferred that such a line stay that thin. Whenever it needs to be found we have the courts to decide on a case-by-case basis where it is, and those same courts also define the nature of that line by setting precedence.
Our future Prime Minister ignores this EU Bull. [URL="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/19/boris-johnson-wins-most-offensive-erdogan-poem-competition"]http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/19/boris-johnson-wins-most-offensive-erdogan-poem-competition[/URL]
[QUOTE=uber.;50352590]I don't really see in a point in arguing with someone about something as basic as: "Why maybe you shouldn't deny the holocaust?" Ask a holocaust survivor. Or a history teacher. Usually this comes from just being a decent human being, honestly.[/QUOTE] I have to believe that you are being deliberately dense. Where in this thread did I say it should be "ok" to deny the Holocaust? I haven't said that. I said it shouldn't be [B]illegal[/B]. We should fight against Holocaust deniers with debate. Jesus Christ man, you have got to be doing this on purpose, there is no way you misread all of my posts leading up to this.
[QUOTE=uber.;50352590]I don't really see in a point in arguing with someone about something as basic as: "Why maybe you shouldn't deny the holocaust?" Ask a holocaust survivor. Or a history teacher. Usually this comes from just being a decent human being, honestly.[/QUOTE] Holocaust denial is idiotic but I [i]really[/i] am not sure that making it illegal is the best way to fight it in most countries. At least, implementing new laws for it. Let the morons play their moron games in the corner. The best way to kill an idea in this day and age of information overload is to refuse to acknowledge its existence. To me, attempting to make holocaust denial explicitly illegal in the US for example sounds like a great way to get all the holocaust deniers to worm their way out of the woodwork and spread their filth, all while riding the wave of 'this is now a national issue' publicity.
[QUOTE=froztshock;50353802]Holocaust denial is idiotic but I [i]really[/i] am not sure that making it illegal is the best way to fight it in most countries. At least, implementing new laws for it. Let the morons play their moron games in the corner. The best way to kill an idea in this day and age of information overload is to refuse to acknowledge its existence. To me, attempting to make holocaust denial explicitly illegal in the US for example sounds like a great way to get all the holocaust deniers to worm their way out of the woodwork and spread their filth, all while riding the wave of 'this is now a national issue' publicity.[/QUOTE] Also, laws like the Holocaust denial ones lead to other religions demanding similar laws to protect their religions from various criticisms. I remember Muslims were asking for laws to prosecute cartoonists who drew Mohammad and they cited Holocaust denial laws as their reason.
Banning something like Holocaust denial sets the precedent that some ideas are too dangerous or offensive to let people discuss. Once you've set that precedent, it all comes down to who's deciding what's considered too dangerous or offensive.
This is only an issue because of the huge Turkish population living in Germany, I'm sure Germans are A-ok with that poem.
[url]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler_Has_Only_Got_One_Ball[/url]
[QUOTE=Pantz Master;50353448]Where in this thread did I say it should be "ok" to deny the Holocaust? [/QUOTE] Where in this thread did I accuse you of saying that? You literally put a word in quotation marks that [B]I didn't even use[/B]. Anyways, I'm done.
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;50349387]This should be prosecuted. Under defamation laws. Possible sentence should be a fine. That is my only disagreement. It should be as if he had read a poem about any other person fucking sheep and watching child porn on live television. Like about a regular German citizen. Erdogan shouldn't get a special treatment but Boehmerman shouldnt get a free pass to defame without a case either. Should be prosecuted and be seen if against the law or not. This is Germany, not Turkey. Court will look at evidence and come to a just decision, if not then the appeal will be just. As far as I know at least, German justice system hasn't got major issues.[/QUOTE] I'd say this is just socialist bullshit and we shouldn't prosecute people for what they have to say, no matter how dumb and offensive it is. [QUOTE=Selek;50349652]Yes, many people tend to forget he even pre-emptively said that his poem was defamation and beyond satire. Announcing that you're about to insult somebody doesn't make it any less insulting in the eyes of the law. Same thing as if you announce you're about to steal something. What blows my mind that Böhmermann is now complaining about this despite fully knowing and apparently accepting the consequences of his defamation with the aforementioned announcement before his poem.[/QUOTE] Did you make that up or are you gonna show us proof?
[QUOTE=uber.;50356719]Where in this thread did I accuse you of saying that? You literally put a word in quotation marks that [B]I didn't even use[/B]. Anyways, I'm done.[/QUOTE] Dunno, how much to take me to the White Horse?
[QUOTE=Pantz Master;50351380]Do you not see the blatant differences between making specific violent threats and denying the Holocaust? And defamation laws do not carry criminal penalties in the US (at least federally, I can't speak to each individual state or municipality). You can't go to jail for saying stuff. It is also way harder to prove defamation, making situations like this unheard of in the US.[/QUOTE] He still lied about a person. He couldn't possibly know if Erdogan is a pedophile. He's a fucking dumb-ass. They didn't even ban the poem entirely. Are people even clear on what parts [I]exactly[/I] were "censored" from the poem, or the parts he was charged for? [editline]20th May 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=EdvardSchnitz;50350492]if Germany is so against denying genocide, i wonder why they are trying to have good relations with Turkey[/QUOTE] The refugee crisis, perhaps? [editline]20th May 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Vodkavia;50350094]Yeah I don't give a fuck about Germany's laws. This is a undeniable, highly abusable abridging of a man's human rights and a embarrassing waste of tax payer money.[/QUOTE] Your country also wastes tax money in embarrassing ways (running a big military costs money, but the money is leaking all over the place and you know it), your country also executes people, your country has a shitty and unfair justice system, yet you talk about human rights? U'huh.
Uh-oh! Looks like you've had a bit too much to think!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.