Welcome to our New Forums!

Our forums have been upgraded and expanded!

The Disturbing Case of Imprisoned Revisionist Ursula Haverbeck

Joined
May 30, 2003
Messages
864
Funny enou[/IMG] [/B]
<b [/IMG]Thought and Speech Crimes: The Disturbing Case of Imprisoned Revisionist Ursula Haverbeck [/B] September 3, 2017 Thomas Müller

Forty percent of American millennials (ages 20-36) believe the government should intervene when citizens say something that might be considered offensive to minorities, a new Pew Research study reveals. It is not entirely clear what is meant by “intervene” and “minorities,” and the term “offensive” is broadly defined. Intuitively, the question likely pertains to the sort of nonsense we are seeing involving censorship and public persecution of those who espouse views that are deemed “politically incorrect.”

Despite the threat of political correctness (PC) from millennials, Americans overall still put a high value on free speech, with only 28% in favor of government regulation of speech. Among respondents, 27 percent of Gen Xers (37-52), 24 percent of Baby Boomers (ages 53-71) and 12 percent of the Silent Generation (age 72 and older) believe government should control and limit offensive speech. The dwindling Greatest Generation universally defends free speech, but they are now over age 90.

[/IMG][/IMG]downplay[/B] the Holocaust. The ter[/IMG]
[/B]<b [/IMG]
[/B] <b [/IMG]Understanding of the Case of Ursula Haverbeck[/B]

I emphasized the word “downplay” because recently the German government imprisoned 88-year-old Ursula Haverbeck for “downplaying the Holocaust”. The court sentenced her to a two-year term for violating section 220a [see below]. For a woman of her advanced age, this is the equivalent of a death sentence.

The following video is the interview that got her into hot water. Watch it before it’s removed from the Internet.
https://archive.org/details/Ursula-Haverbeck-Interview

Apparently, “downplay” [/IMG]Nowhere[/I] does Haverbeck deny that crimes or atrocities were committed against Jews (and others), nor does she refuse to accept that they were rounded up or persecuted. Rather, she speaks mostly about the nature, methods and the numbers, which is deemed “revisionism.”

The follow[/IMG]3) Whoever publ[/IMG]approves of, den[/IMG]in a manner capable of disturbing the public peace[/B] shall be punished with imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine.[/I]
Please, watch Haverbeck for yourself. See if you can identify her so-called offensive words that “might disturb the public peace.” In fact, Haverbeck was remarkably well composed and was relatively careful in her word choice. Despite the news coverage on her imprisonment, I certainly didn’t hear her “approve of” atrocities or claim they didn’t happen. Do you hear her “rendering harmless” acts committed under the rule of National Socialism?
She did go into the rarely discussed — but I think much-needed — topic of the mass murder (Hellstorm) of German civilians and POWs as the war wound down and after the defeat of Germany. Basically, she is “guilty” of processing things outside of the box or standard narrative. Her “revisionism” only involves researching and questioning the size and degree of atrocities against Jews and the aspects of the Hellstorm.
 

Al Jilwah: Chapter IV

"It is my desire that all my followers unite in a bond of unity, lest those who are without prevail against them." - Shaitan

Back
Top