|February 17th, 2008||#1|
The Legal Situation in France
The Gayssot Act (Loi Gayssot), voted for on July 13, 1990, makes it an offense in France to question the existence of the category of crimes against humanity as defined in the London Charter of 1945, on the basis of which Nazi leaders were convicted by the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg in 1945-46. Proposed by the communist deputy Jean-Claude Gayssot, it is one of several European laws prohibiting Holocaust denial. Its first article states that "any discrimination founded on the membership or non-membership to an ethnic group, a nation, a race or a religion is prohibited." The Commission nationale consultative des droits de l'homme (Human Rights Consultative National Commission), created in 1947, is charged of making a yearly, public report on the situation of racism in France.
After Robert Faurisson was removed from his university chair under the act, he challenged it as a violation of his rights to freedom of expression under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The Human Rights Committee upheld the Gayssot Act as necessary to counter possible anti-Semitism.
Text of the law (in French)
Last edited by Alex Linder; February 17th, 2008 at 12:52 PM.
|February 17th, 2008||#2|
Le Pen found guilty of Holocaust denial
By Henry Samuel in Paris
Disgraced French far-Right leader Jean-Marie Le Pen was given a three-month suspended sentence on Friday for calling the Nazi occupation of France "not particularly inhuman".
The 79-year-old founder of the National Front party, not present for the verdict in a Paris court, was found guilty of denying a crime against humanity and complicity in condoning war crimes, both violations of France's Holocaust denial legislation.
Mr Le Pen was also fined 10,000 euros. His lawyer said he would appeal against the sentence, which was below the five months called for by the prosecution.
The charges relate to comments Mr Le Pen made in an interview with far-Right Rivarol magazine in 2005.
The court said Mr Le Pen had sought to "instill doubt" about Nazi persecution of Resistance members and Jews and their deportation.
It also ruled that he had "re-written history" to present the Gestapo in a favourable light, while making no mention of its crimes when referring to a 1944 massacre in the town of Villeneuve d'Ascq.
"The court reproaches my client for not talking about certain episodes. That is impossible to defend," Mr Le Pen's lawyer, Walleyrand de Saint Juste, told The Daily Telegraph.
The veteran leader has been convicted of several other controversial outbursts, but anti-racism organisation MRAP praised the "very heavy" sentence, saying it was very rare to convict someone via the press.
A journalist at Rivarol and the newspaper's head received fines. All three were ordered to pay a symbolic euro to the Sons and Daughters of French Jews association.
The verdict comes as the National Front, which Mr Le Pen will lead for another three years, is facing political and final meltdown.
|February 17th, 2008||#4|
56 lawyers have launched November 21, a call for the repeal of the "memorial laws" - whose law antirévisionniste Fabius-Gayssot - here is the list of courageous signatories.
Bertrand MATHIEU, Professeur, Université Paris I
François TERRE, Membre de l’Institut François EARTH, Member of the Institute
Anne Marie LE POURHIET, Professeur Université Rennes 1
Olivier GOHIN, Professeur, Université Paris II
Thierry DI MANNO, Professeur, Université de Toulon
François GAUDU, Professeur, Université Paris I
Anne LEVADE, Professeur Université Paris XII
Christophe BOUTIN, Professeur Université de Caen
Yves JEGOUZO, Professeur Université Paris I
Florence CHALTIEL, Professeur, IEP Grenoble Florence
Olivier DUBOS, Professeur, Université Bordeaux IV
Marie Claire PONTHOREAU, Professeur Université Bordeaux IV
Maryse DEGUERGUE, Professeur, Université Paris I
Frédéric SUDRE, Professeur, Université de Montpellier
Paul CASSIA, Professeur, Université Versailles-Saint Quentin en Yvelines
Diane de BELLESCIZE, Professeur, Université du Havre
Henri OBERDORFF, Professeur, IEP de Grenoble
Olivier LECUCQ, Professeur, Université de Pau et des Pays de l’Adour
Jean MORANGE, Professeur, Université Paris II
Gilles LEBRETON, Professeur, Université du Havre
Yvonne FLOUR, Professeur, Université Paris I
Jean-Jacques DAIGRE, Professeur, Université Paris I
Catherine LABRUSSE RIOU, Professeur, Université Paris I
Yves DAUDET, Professeur, Université Paris I
Olivier JOUANJAN, professeur, Universités de Strasbourg
Alain PIETRANCOSTA, Professeur, Université Paris I
Jean GAYON, Professeur, Université Paris I
Michel MENJUCQ, Professeur, Université Paris I
Raymonde VATINET, Professeur, Université Paris V
Danielle CORRIGNAN-CARSIN, Professeur, Université Rennes 1
Alexis CONSTANTIN, Professeur, université Rennes 1
Pierre AVRIL, Professeur émérite, Université Paris II
Bernard CHANTEBOUT, Professeur émérite, Université Paris V
Guillaume WICKER, Professeur, Université Bordeaux IV
Michel GERMAIN, Professeur, Université Paris II
Joseph PINI, Professeur, Université Aix-Marseille III
Geneviève BASTID BURDEAU, Professeur Université Paris I
Hervé LECUYER, Professeur, Université Paris II
Florence DEBOISSY, Professeur, Université Bordeaux IV
Marie France CHRISTOPHE TCHAKALOFF, Professeur, Université Paris I
Jacques PETIT, Professeur, Université Rennes 1
Christian LARROUMET, Professeur Université Paris II
Christophe de LA MARDIERE, Professeur, Université de Dijon
Laurent AYNES, Professeur, Université Paris I
Olivier BARRET, Professeur, Université Paris V
Michel FROMONT, Professeur émérite, Université Paris I
Yves GAUDEMET, Professeur, Université Paris II
Vincent HEUZÉ, Professeur, Université Paris I
Philippe STOFFEL-MUNCK, Professeur, Université Paris I
Pierre MAYER, Professeur, Université Paris I
Philippe PORTIER, Professeur, Université Rennes I
Frédéric POLLAUD-DULIAN, Professeur, Université Paris I
André ROUX, Professeur, Université Aix Marseille III
Stéphane PIERRE CAPS, Professeur, Université de Nancy
Francis HAMON, Professeur émérite, Université Paris XI
Alexandre VIALA, Professeur, Université Montpellier
|February 17th, 2008||#5|
The French Government's hypocrisy, Islam and Holocaust revisionism (2)
Mon, 11 Feb 2008 15:44:29
A Second Open Letter to France's Ambassador to the US by Paul Grubach
Faurisson was severely injured in a nearly fatal attack on Sept. 16, 1989.
This is a Second Open Letter to France's Ambassador to the United States by Paul Grubach February 8, 2008
Ambassador Pierre Vimont Embassy of France in the United States 4101 Reservoir Road, NW Washington, D. C. 20007
Dear Ambassador Vimont
As you are undoubtedly aware by now, Holocaust revisionist scholar Dr. Robert Faurisson will probably stand trial for comments he made at the Iran Holocaust Conference of December 2006. Allegedly, he violated France's Gayssot Act, a statute passed in 1990 that prohibits any public doubt about the alleged Jewish Holocaust.
There is a new development to this ongoing story that I would like to bring to your attention.
On January 24, Dr. Faurisson was taken into police custody for questioning and a search of his house was carried out. In my last open letter to you of January 15, I brought attention to the hypocritical double standard of the French government.
In September 2006, high school teacher Robert Redeker made a scathing attack upon the Prophet Mohammed and the Islamic religion in the center-right daily Le Figaro. Because of threats to his life, he was forced to go into hiding.
The French government immediately came to his defense, offering him police protection and a public statement on his behalf. In reference to Redeker's case, former Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin called the threats to his life "unacceptable," and added: "We are in a democracy. Everyone has the right to express his views freely, while respecting others, of course." (See The New York Times, 30 September 2006, p. A 3)
That this is an outrageous lie is demonstrated by the ongoing plight of Dr. Faurisson. In 1991, French "democracy" demanded that Dr. Faurisson be removed from his university chair. In July 2006, French "democracy" again violated his inalienable right to freedom of speech and research. He was convicted of "Holocaust denial" by a Paris court over remarks he made on Iranian television, and was given a three-month suspended prison term and he has to pay 18 000 euros.
Clearly, as the cases of Redeker and Faurisson show, one has the right to attack and violate the sacred beliefs of Muslims, but one has no right whatsoever to question and repudiate the Holocaust doctrine, one of the most sacred beliefs of Jewish-Zionism. The sacred belief and taboo of the Jewish people is enshrined in law in France. If you contest the Holocaust, you are prosecuted and persecuted.
However, the sacred beliefs of Muslims are not enshrined in law. If you attack Muslim beliefs, this is depicted as an expression of "freedom of speech." Once again, this is evidence of a hypocritical double standard. I have come across another case which further bolsters my point.
Do you recognize the name of the French Jewish writer, Marek Halter? He co-founded the so-called "anti-racist" group, SOS-Racisme. There is an interview of him in the February 11, 2005 issue of the English edition of The International Jerusalem Post, (pp. 9-11).
Halter claims that France's rapidly growing Islamic population is too frequently incompatible with democracy. Let me give you two of his direct quotes. Halter stated: "All of a sudden we realize that they [Muslims] are not a small minority anymore and that the way most of them practice their religion is not compatible with French democratic principles." He also stated: "Muslims threaten to weaken a French democracy that no longer knows how to impose its rules without seeming oppressive."
In April 2007 the European Union made inciting racism and xenophobia crimes throughout its 27 member states in a landmark decision. Even before April 2007, when Halter made these statements, inciting racism and xenophobia in France were outlawed.
That is to say, Halter made these statements when these "racism and xenophobia" laws were on the books. A French prosecutor could cogently argue that Halter's statements incite hatred and xenophobia against Muslims, and thus, the man should be prosecuted. After all, he is stating that Muslims as a group threaten to weaken and even destroy French "democracy."
This will cause people to hate Muslims. Your so-called French "democracy" allows him to make anti-Muslim statements. Yet, Robert Faurisson is put on trial by this same French "democracy" for making statements that contest and debunk Holocaust orthodoxy.
Do you see my point, Ambassador Vimont? France grants "freedom of speech" to Jewish people like Marek Halter who criticize and attack Muslims. Yet, "democratic" France denies freedom of speech to non-Jews like Faurisson who question and debunk the orthodox view of the Holocaust.
If France was truly a democracy as former Prime Minister de Villepin claims, it would defend Dr. Faurisson's right to freedom of research on the Holocaust. That is to say, there would be no "limits in advance" or "prewritten conclusions" about his Holocaust research.
After all, France grants freedom of research for atheists and others who deny the existence of God or attack the Islamic and Christian religions.
If the French government does prosecute and imprison Dr. Faurisson for his Holocaust revisionist views, this will only demonstrate to the world the truth of his arguments. The French government cannot disprove his Holocaust revisionism with reason and science, but must resort to oppressive laws and prison sentences in its attempt to silence truth.
Sincerely, Paul Grubach
|February 17th, 2008||#6|
PERIGUEUX, France - President Nicolas Sarkozy on Friday defended a plan to require 10-year-olds to honor child victims of the Holocaust, saying adults should not hide terrible truths from children.
The idea, floated by the president earlier this week, rankled psychologists worried about traumatizing youth and has teachers reviving debates about how France remembers World War II. But Sarkozy stood firmly by the plan in meetings with teachers over proposed reforms of France's school system.
"We must tell a child the truth," he said. "We do not traumatize children by giving them the gift of the memory of the country."
The president wants each child in the last year of French primary school, at about 10 years old, to "adopt" the memory of one of the 11,000 Jewish children in France killed in the Holocaust, learning about the selected child's background and fate.
"If you do not talk to them of this tragedy, then you should not be surprised if it repeats itself," Sarkozy said. "It is ignorance that prompts the repetition of abominable situations, not knowledge. Make our children into children with open eyes."
Sarkozy outlined no details of the plan, which does not have to be submitted to a vote in parliament. Education Minister Xavier Darcos said the practice may not be obligatory, but the goal is to have children start adopting Holocaust victims in the next school year.
Respected former Health Minister Simone Veil, herself a survivor of the Auschwitz concentration camp, said she found the plan chilling.
"It's unimaginable, unbearable, tragic, and above all, unfair," Veil was quoted as saying on the Web site of the magazine L'Express. "We can't inflict this on 10-year-old children. We can't ask a child to identify with a dead child. The weight of this memory is much too heavy to bear."
Supporters of the plan include renowned Nazi hunter Serge Klarsfeld. Much of the existing information about France's Holocaust victims came out of research led by Klarsfeld.
Psychiatrist Serge Hefez was among those who voiced reservations about Sarkozy's idea, saying on LCI television that adults should not "impose ghosts" on children.
Teachers unions complained that they were not consulted ahead of time.
|February 17th, 2008||#7|
Join Date: May 2007
It would not surprise me if a ZOG educater suggested that the Kwa impose such a program as well. However, if imposed, can it be turned against them?