Double standard of EU 'Prevention of revision of the Past'

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

This sounds to me like more example of capitalist Europe taking her chance to belittle communism. Perhaps 'capitalist Europe should concentrate on getting her own house in order before making charges against regimes of the past. Is there anything more repressive for example than making the ordinary population pay for the excesses of the few.

Do you feel in general that this type of law is a restriction on free speech?
What is your opinion on 'so called holocaust denial legislation'?? To me it is like a law the Nazi's would have approved of.
Questions open to anyone.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/21/european-commission-communist-crimes-nazism

EU rejects eastern states' call to outlaw denial of crimes by communist regimes

Eastern European states wanted Soviet crimes 'treated according to the same standards' as those of Nazi regimes

The European commission has rejected calls from eastern Europe to introduce a so-called double genocide law that would criminalise the denial of crimes perpetrated by communist regimes, in the same way many EU countries ban the denial of the Holocaust.

Last week six countries wrote to Viviane Reding, the European justice commissioner, calling for the "public condoning, denial and gross trivialisation of totalitarian crimes" to be punished.

Foreign ministers from Lithuania, Latvia, Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania and the Czech Republic said communist crimes "should be treated according to the same standards" as those of Nazi regimes, notably in those countries with Holocaust denial laws.

But the EU executive will say in a report due tomorrow that opinion is too divided on the matter and that there is no legal basis allowing Brussels to act.

"There is no consensus on it. The different member states have wildly differing approaches," EU justice spokesman Matthew Newman told the Guardian. He said the commission takes the issue "very seriously", but: "At this stage, the conditions to make a legislative proposal have not been met. The commission will continue to keep this matter under review."

The east European countries point to the EU's ability to make laws relating to "particularly serious" cross-border crimes and a separate EU decision permitting the crafting of rules targeting racism and xenophobia.

But the commission says neither legal instrument mentions totalitarianism and rejects the idea of double genocide. "The bottom line is, obviously, what they did was horrendous, but communist regimes did not target ethnic minorities," said Newman.

According to Lithuania, whose foreign minister leads the campaign to create a new law, the EU's understanding of genocide should be extended to include crimes against groups defined by "social status or political convictions".

Andrius Grikienis, a spokesman for Lithuania's mission to the EU, said: "During the first years of Soviet occupation, Lithuania lost more than 780,000 of its residents. 444,000 fled Lithuania or were repatriated, 275,697 were deported to the gulag or exile, 21,556 resistance fighters and their supporters were killed and 25,000 died on the front."

By comparison, he said: "More than 200,000 citizens of Jewish origin were killed by Nazis and their collaborators."

The commission is also uneasy about wading into a highly controversial area. A number of western EU countries oppose the proposal, suggesting that it is a thinly-veiled attempt at rehabilitation of domestic collaborators while antisemitism remains a live issue on the streets and in the media in the east.

On 25 November, the ambassadors to the Lithuanian capital, Vilnius, of seven EU states including the UK sent a letter to the country's president complaining about a newspaper article by an interior ministry historian, Petras Stankeras, that described the Holocaust as a "legend".

In the letter, they complained about how a court in May had ruled that the swastika is a "traditional Lithuanian symbol" while "spurious attempts are made to equate the uniquely evil genocide of the Jews with Soviet crimes against Lithuania, which, though great in magnitude, cannot be regarded as equivalent in either their intention or result".

Efraim Zuroff, the Nazi-hunter and director of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre's Israel office, describes the effort by the six eastern states as a "false symmetry".

"We have no problem with a day of commemoration for communist crimes, and indeed, something should be done, but the Holocaust was a unique tragedy in history," he said.

"For all the terrible crimes of the USSR, you can't compare the people who built Auschwitz with the people who liberated it. Nazi Germany would probably not have been defeated if it weren't for Russia."

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

You really are struggling for an argument there!!!:D -

xflyer wrote: »

Jonniebgood1, just to tip you off. You seem to be missing the theme of this particular thread. Your opponents are less interested in the fact that the EU won't prosecute pepretrators of Communist crimes but merely highlight the supposed hypocrisy of the EU in continuing to persecute and prosecute members of Third Reich and continuing the promote the 'myth' of six million Jews eliminated in the Holocaust. This as you may gather from Mahatma Coat's post is the fault of the Jews who are still lying and making money from it.

So it's pointless debating whether or not Communist crimes should be investigated because this thread isn't about that. It's part of an ongoing campaign to rehabilitate the Third Reich and rewrite history. Check out other posts of these individuals. But it's all over the internet too.

Now I'll put on my M40 and retire to my bunker to avoid the incoming.

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

If you are going to say things like that then you should be specific and be able to back it up with evidence. If not then keep your counsel to yourself.

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Again- refer to post no. 9 if you have trouble understanding this. I don't see why your getting yourself worked up about the use of quotes (or irony quotes as you refer). I will call it a 'crime' unless I see guilt.

Thus my 'crime' is using inverted commas whilst your crime is trying to write off alternative views as pathetic (as in post no. 26), cheap shots (as in post no. 27), nonsense (as in post no. 16), Pathetic & nonsense (as in post no. 11) and nonsense (as in post no. 3).
So:
1. I would seriously like to know if you think that is a convincing way to argue your point of view in a discussion? Answer that please? To most observers, when you use that type of vitriol in so many different posts it shows a lack of ability to engage properly in the discussion.

If you would like to engage then I also previously asked:
2. Would you bring a complete former regime to account??? ie everybody who acted to put down the Prague spring uprising is guilty? Surely this is a local matter or 'political' as opposed to a war crime and should be left alone? Are there particular wrongs for which you think legislation is needed (specifics)?

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Confirmation of post 28. Thanks. (not able to answer the questions either!)