Free Speech and the Monika Schaefer trial

The RODOH Lounge is a place for general discussion, preferably non-Holocaust. The Lounge is only lightly moderated but please keep this a friendly place to chat with and get to know your fellow board participants.
User avatar
blake121666
Posts: 3123
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:26 am
Contact:

Re: Free Speech and the Monika Schaefer trial

Post by blake121666 » Thu Jul 19, 2018 11:18 pm

Here is Alfred Schaefer's youtube page:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPPoJn ... _T-Il6lx5w

I haven't even really looked into exactly WHAT the charges are against his sister and he. But apparently he was interrogated for a speech he gave at the postwar German POW camp at Bretzenheim according to this video. The English version of this speech can be found here:

https://americannationalsocialist.com/2 ... etzenheim/

It's an interesting speech. Certainly nothing that an American would be jailed for. I don't think the whole "extermination of kikes" thing would be jailable in America. Apparently that was said very recently on June 30th. And according to Hektor at CODOH that has been misleadingly taken out of context in the video I saw.

So whether Alfred Schaefer is full-blown nuts or just upset about what he thinks to be a "truer" version of history is quite debatable. I think he sees himself as a martyr for the cause of his "truer" version of history which he believes in this case. He has probably broken a law or two of Germany though - which is regrettable. If he were not actually inside Germany itself when breaking these laws (which aren't American laws) I'd see the case as OBVIOUSLY wrong towards him. I don't like such laws regardless; but one can't enter another country and brazenly break its laws imo.

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8557
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Free Speech and the Monika Schaefer trial

Post by been-there » Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:02 am

blake121666 wrote:
Thu Jul 19, 2018 11:18 pm
... He has probably broken a law or two of Germany though - which is regrettable. If he were not actually inside Germany itself when breaking these laws (which aren't American laws) I'd see the case as OBVIOUSLY wrong towards him. I don't like such laws regardless; but one can't enter another country and brazenly break its laws imo.
You wrote: "Probably broken..."??? :o
You have just realised that you were misinformed by a Jewish news article. Wouldn't it be wiser now, to become better informed BEFORE you express another possibly illinformed opinion?

You wrote: "one can't enter another country and brazenly break its laws imo"
How about when those "laws" break the laws of your own country and have been used to persecute and unjustly incarcerate your own sister?
How about when those laws are used to denigrate, smear and demonise your parents and their whole generation?
How about when those laws have been invented at the behest of a 'tribe' to protect their very real genocide and übermensch ethnic cleansing for lebensraum?
How about when those laws have been invented to protect a false history from investigation?
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
blake121666
Posts: 3123
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:26 am
Contact:

Re: Free Speech and the Monika Schaefer trial

Post by blake121666 » Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:33 am

been-there wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:02 am
blake121666 wrote:
Thu Jul 19, 2018 11:18 pm
... He has probably broken a law or two of Germany though - which is regrettable. If he were not actually inside Germany itself when breaking these laws (which aren't American laws) I'd see the case as OBVIOUSLY wrong towards him. I don't like such laws regardless; but one can't enter another country and brazenly break its laws imo.
You wrote: "Probably broken..."??? :o
You have just realised that you were misinformed by a Jewish news article. Wouldn't it be wiser now, to become better informed BEFORE you express another possibly illinformed opinion?

You wrote: "one can't enter another country and brazenly break its laws imo"
How about when those "laws" break the laws of your own country and have been used to persecute and unjustly incarcerate your own sister?
How about when those laws are used to denigrate, smear and demonise your parents and their whole generation?
How about when those laws have been invented at the behest of a 'tribe' to protect their very real genocide and übermensch ethnic cleansing for lebensraum?
How about when those laws have been invented to protect a false history from investigation?
Yeah, his giving a nazi salute in a German court is really the type of law he needs to break. :roll:

I wasn't "misinformed"; and my opinion was not "illinformed". Why don't you go to Germany and give Nazi salutes and talk about exterminating the kikes? I'd give the same exact opinion of you. If they lock you up or send you to the madhouse, you asked for it!

BTW, justify each of your points. Do you know anything about this case? You're hysterical, BT! Flesh out these silly claims of yours.

EDIT: And these Schaefers "illinformed" versions of history are the equivalent of flat-Earth theories. It's regrettable that such persons are at risk of imprisonment in Germany; but he's obviously running with "misinformed" emotions with his half-baked beliefs (as you are doing with this post).

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8557
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Free Speech and the Monika Schaefer trial

Post by been-there » Fri Jul 20, 2018 6:45 pm

A civil liberties group is urging the Canadian government to end the "unjust and immoral" imprisonment of Monika Schaefer, a German-Canadian woman on trial in Germany for publishing videos...

The Ontario Civil Liberties Association says it's concerned about Canada's apparent unwillingness to come to the aid of Schaefer, who it describes as a Canadian "political prisoner" who was charged under a German criminal law that does not exist in Canada and is contrary to international law.

In a letter signed by executive director Joseph Hickey, the association calls on Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould and Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland to act immediately, starting with appointing a consular observer and direct contact for Schaefer.

"We ask you both to do everything you can to save Monika Schaefer from her ongoing unjust and immoral imprisonment in Germany. Every day that Canada refuses to act or acts ineffectively is a day that Ms. Schaefer spends in a foreign jail. Therefore, we express the required urgency." the letter says.

...The civil liberties association says Germany's law against Holocaust denial is contrary to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which was ratified by Canada in 1976.

The United Nations Human Rights Committee has interpreted the covenant to be incompatible with laws that penalize the expression of opinions about historical facts, it says.

"The covenant does not permit general prohibition of expressions of an erroneous opinion or an incorrect interpretation of past events," the human-rights committee has said, according to the letter.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton ... -1.4750063

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8557
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Free Speech and the Monika Schaefer trial

Post by been-there » Sun Jul 22, 2018 12:24 am

PARTS OF A LETTER FROM MONIKA SCHAEFER TO BARBARA ANN NOWAK

July 1, 2018
Dear Barbara,
thank you, dear sister, for your long and wonderful letter and envelope with Elvis stamps in a heart. I notice details. Well that one would be pretty hard to miss — haha – unless I was a dullard.
And if I was a dullard, I guess I wouldn’t be in prison for speaking words.

I must tell you, so you don’t think I’m a slacker, that your letter took exactly 8 weeks and a day to reach me from when it was postmarked! I used to say that the average time for mail one way in and out of prison was about a month but now I would put the average at 6 weeks. Pretty bad eh? It leads to slow conversations. Maybe that’s the equivalent of the slow food movement and I like the slow food movement so maybe the slow conversations are a good thing? Having just reread your letter before responding I’m kind of in free flow here, inspired by you.

...yes you can send me a few pictures but not too many. There is a limit of 20 pictures in the cell and I have my limit but when people send me a few more, then I can trade them out and send the excess into storage. So if you sent three or four pictures in a letter nobody gets in a sweat. I wonder what the storage looks like. Stuff keeps getting sent there, that people try to send me and I cannot have. I will need a few wheel barrels or a pickup truck when I leave here. People send stuff and I can’t have it, how sad. It’s pretty strict around here. Oh and you mentioned internet, definitely not! I wonder if people are trying to send me emails. Oh dear, I dread trying to wade through thousands of emails when I get out. I will probably just have to delete all and start over as it will be too overwhelming.

The hot water just got delivered through the little hatch in the door. I feel so special here, getting room service like that! Now I am going to enjoy my cup of coffee, knit and listen to music on the radio for a bit. That is my early morning routine I’ll be back.

An hour later… I love that part of the day. Come to think of it, there are many parts of the day that I really enjoy. So you see, they are not getting me down. I am sure that you would be the same. You wouldn’t waste very many minutes or seconds on self-pity and you would get right to work on becoming creative and using the time well.

On the subject of being well, I want to add that I certainly couldn’t do it alone! Just like you said about the karaoke coming from God, I too feel I am being guided and helped by spirit and that includes all the loving energy thoughts and prayers coming from many many people including yourself. Thank you also for the Bible verses, and the Elvis lyrics. We used to sing the German folk song Muss I Denn, around the campfire when my dad’s best friend came over from Germany and visited us one summer with his wife and two of his many children, they did that twice with different children the second time. He belted out those folk songs and we sang along and just loved it.

Well, my dear, it has been lovely spending part of my morning with you. Let’s do it again sometime, yes? I’ll put the kettle on… We are the birds flying free in this picture.

love

Monika.

User avatar
blake121666
Posts: 3123
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:26 am
Contact:

Re: Free Speech and the Monika Schaefer trial

Post by blake121666 » Fri Jul 27, 2018 5:10 am

been-there and others might like to read through the following site following the trial:

http://grizzom.blogspot.com/2018/07/sho ... trial.html

I've only scanned through this myself. Why such a trial is even happening is absurd if it is to infringe on foreigners' freedom of speech.

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8557
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Free Speech and the Monika Schaefer trial

Post by been-there » Fri Jul 27, 2018 10:03 am

I've read through it. Thanks for the link, Blake. Much of it I'd read elsewhere.

Alfred appears to have some extemely nutty views. OR he trying to get off prison time by appearing insane and thus hoping to receive a merciful judgement because of being unable to think sanely and rationally.

Not only does he think the Beatles songs and lyrics were written for them as part of some 'mind control conspiracy', but he also argues the 1969 moon landing was a hoax filmed by Stanley Kubrick and was confessed by him.
Finally, Alfred Schaefer also mentioned the moon landing, which should also have been a lie, because the films and pictures about the moon landing were produced in a studio. The American director Stanley Kubrick produced the films about the moon landing. He said that in an interview , which was recorded three days before his death and was released after his will only 15 years after his death. Stanley Kubrick was a science-fiction specialist. From him comes the movie " 2001: Odyssey in Space" from the year 1968, which was awarded four Oscars. "The film is now considered one of the best and most influential films of all time and the American Film Institute voted it the # 1 best sci-fi movie of all time."

Stanley Kubrick had not interviewed for years. But he wanted to give this last interview because he did not want to take this lie about the moon landing to the grave.
This message about the Kubrick interview and the studio recording of the moon landing by Alfred Schaefer must have impressed the two judges, esp. The adjudicating judge, because you could watch how they threw each other but quite astonished looks in the sense, as if esp. at the judge at least the thought flashed that Alfred Schaefer actually says the truth with his statements.
Erm... or maybe they looked at each other in "astonishment" to confirm whether they were both thinking 'the same thing, viz. this guy is a bleedin' loony'.

What a waste of an opportunity to expose the injustice of holocaust thought-crime laws and to inform more people of the irrefutable aspects of holocaust-revisionist information. As Zündel together with Doug Christie did.

What's more he debases the content and impact of his sister's message and of the other beautiful champions of truth and freedom...
Image
Image
. . . .

Meanwhile...
An American Jew denounces the persecution suffered by Alison Chabloz and Monika Schaefer

https://alisonchabloz.com/2018/07/24/an ... -schaefer/

from here:
http://robertfaurisson.blogspot.com/201 ... ution.html

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8557
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Free Speech and the Monika Schaefer trial

Post by been-there » Tue Dec 18, 2018 1:33 am

"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8557
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Free Speech and the Monika Schaefer trial

Post by been-there » Tue Dec 18, 2018 1:59 pm

When you defend yourself in a ‘thought-crime’ trial
your 'defence' and explanation of how you reached your intellectual conclusions becomes further thought crimes.


been-there wrote:
Tue Dec 18, 2018 1:33 am
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8557
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Free Speech and the Monika Schaefer trial

Post by been-there » Mon Dec 31, 2018 5:41 am

.
Here is an interesting article that attempts to argue that questioning or refuting the details of 'the holocaust' narrative is hate speech because it implies Jews have been lying and/or swindling, and that is anti-semitism.

Its a Catch 22 situation then?
I.e. if it can be proved by historical research that 'holocaust' survivor claims are untrue, this becomes an anti-semitic hate-crime as it demonstrates that Jews both individually and collectively have lied. :ugeek:
Can Holocaust denial legally be considered hate speech?

BY DOUG BEAZLEY August 9, 2018

...the trial of Monika Schaefer in Germany... Schaefer, a German-Canadian (and a former Green Party candidate in Alberta) has published multiple videos online denying the fact of the Holocaust. She was arrested on January 3 while visiting relatives in Germany and now faces six charges of “incitement of the people.” She faces up to three years’ imprisonment on each charge.

Schaefer is getting some high-profile support back home. Last month, the Ontario Civil Liberties Association wrote to Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland and Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould to demand the federal government step in to “save (Schaefer) from her ongoing unjust and immoral imprisonment in Germany.”

The OCLA argues that Schaefer is a “political prisoner” on trial for violating a German criminal law that does not exist in Canada, and that “is categorically contrary to international law.”

It cites the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Canada ratified and which states that laws penalizing “the expression of opinions about historical facts” are “incompatible with the obligations that the Covenant imposes.”

The OCLA’s stance drew a sharp response from Shimon Koffler Fogel, CEO of the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs. In an op-ed piece published last month, Fogel stated that Germany’s Holocaust denial law doesn’t violate the covenant — that multiple courts and human rights bodies, including the European Court of Human Rights, have ruled it’s compatible with international law.
Who’s right?

Image
Shimon Koffler Fogel

So far, the Canadian government doesn’t seem to be offering Schaefer more than the usual consular assistance. That might reflect, in part, Canada’s unique mid-Atlantic position among countries that have laws governing ‘hate speech’ — not as libertarian as the Americans, not as restrictive as many European countries.

Germany’s Holocaust law grew out of its post-war sense of guilt and responsibility for the monstrous crimes [enforced disassociation by Allied creation of 'thought crime' legislation] of the Nazi regime. It criminalizes the act of denying the genocide (or of downplaying its scope by, for example, claiming that far fewer people died in the Holocaust than the six million figure cited by credible historians).

The OCLA is correct when it says that denying the historical fact of the Holocaust, or claiming it’s been overblown, is not illegal in Canada. But the legal status of Holocaust denial in Canada isn’t that simple, says a specialist in constitutional law and freedom of expression.

The OCLA makes the mistake of assuming that the absence of a law specifically banning Holocaust denial means we have no law on the matter,” says Richard Moon, a professor of law at the University of Windsor.

In Canada, hate speech is covered in sections 318 and 319 of the Criminal Code. Section 318 makes the promotion of genocide against an “identifiable group” an indictable offence. The first half of s. 319 forbids the communication of statements that incite “hatred against any identifiable group where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace,” while the second half outlaws public statements that “willfully (promote) hatred against any identifiable group.”

No one can be prosecuted under s. 319 (2) without the express permission of the provincial attorney general. Those accused have recourse to four key defences:
1. that the statements made were true;
2. that they were expressed in “good faith” to make a religious argument;
3. that the person making the statement believed “on reasonable grounds” that they were true and served “the public benefit”;
4. or that the statement was made “in good faith” to point out a source of racial or religious tension.

That’s a high bar for prosecutors to reach — but it certainly doesn’t rule out a conviction in a case of Holocaust denial, says Moon. “The question,” he says, “is whether Holocaust denial itself amounts to willful promotion of hatred.” In many cases, he argues, it does.

“Holocaust denials almost always are accompanied by specific claims that the Jews as a people are deceptive, controlling, seeking to make false claims to their benefit,” says Moon. “They tend to play on racist stereotypes about Jews as deceptive.”

So the critical difference between the German and Canadian laws regarding Holocaust denial is in the nature of their targets: in Germany, it’s the statement, while in Canada, it’s the effect on the identifiable group. If someone publicly accuses the Jewish people of having hoodwinked the world about the existence or extent of the Holocaust, that could be interpreted under Canadian law as hate speech.

Prof. Moon says:
“The question is whether Holocaust denial can be viewed as willfully promoting hatred. It’s true that historical claims should be open to dispute, even when the claims are foolish and wrong. But there is almost always another agenda behind these claims about the Holocaust, and that is to present Jews as liars and swindlers. This agenda is often explicit.
So it may very well be the case that acts of Holocaust denial are contrary to Canadian law, once we look at how and where it happens.”
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests