It concerns the Holocaust revisionist statements by the Arab female judge, Reem Naddaf, in the Nazareth court verdict that ruled that illegal pro-terror activities by an anti-Israel extremist are protected speech, but criticism of those same illegal pro-terror activities is "slander". Here is the full text in translation:
Judicial Autism
By Ben-Dror Yemini
"Anyone today who 'dares' to recheck the events of the Holocaust and its scale, from any point of view, whether it be human, historic, scientific, political, or otherwise, immediately is turned into the target for attacks and accusations of being an anti-Semite and Holocaust Denier, worthy of being dubbed Judenrat or a Jew for Hitler.
"This phenomenon becomes buttressed even more when factual statistics, data, or opinions and theories about the Holocaust are presented that differ from the statistics about the Holocaust published to date or that deviate from the known consensus.
"This phenomenon is in opposition to the principles of democracy, which are supposed to stand firm especially in those cases where stormy public debate arises about such sensitive and painful subjects."
That sums up, albeit in a somewhat palliated manner, the position of the President of Iran, Ahmed Ahmadinejad, about to hold an assembly of Holocaust Deniers in Teheran. He is, as is well known, a stout defender of academic freedom of expression. Therefore groups of Holocaust Deniers, who "deviate from the known consensus", together with some others, will be assembling in Iran, and the 'truth' of the Holocaust Deniers will be published for all to see.
Except that it was not Ahmadinejad who made those statements cited above! These were all statements that were written by a woman judge in Israel (Reem Naddaf of Nazareth court . SP), in her ruling in a libel suit between two academics. The rhetoric that justifies and enables hooligans and bigots to use "freedom of expression" and "academic freedom" in order to promote their agenda has arrived in Israel as well. It matters not at all which side is in the right in the specific court case. There was no justification for these pronouncements about "departures from the consensus" regarding the Holocaust, in which Holocaust Deniers wash their
filthy laundry, to make a determination. And lest we err, the woman judge adds for us that she is simply not aware that David Irving himself is a Holocaust Denier. She does not know that Irving was judged in Britain and was declared a Holocaust Denier and a liar. She does not know that this same Irving is now sitting in prison in Vienna for Holocaust Denial.
This woman judge is traveling down the familiar path of phony "rights discourse". This is where automatic judgment is always relativistic, where it denies there is any reality at all, only "theories". Actually, most liberal freedoms are misused by fringe elements. In the USA, these include the Neo-Nazis marching through neighborhoods of Holocaust survivors in Skokie, and in Israel they include Kahanists who want to march through Umm al-Fahm, as well as extremist fanatics like Azmi Bishara who endorse "resistance" . meaning terror. All this in the name of freedom of expression.
In Europe, unlike Israel, a red line is being drawn. Hence political parties who oppose basic rights, such as freedom of speech and freedom to organize, are denied constitutional protections for their own rights, because these are rights that these groups would revoke if they were to take power in those countries. This is called "democracy defending itself". This is a worthy model for implementation in Israel. When it is so implemented, instead of liberal rights being the captives of people like Azmi Bishara and Baruch Marzel, those rights will be restored to
their proper position.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment