Austria far-rightist's presidential bid draws ire of local Jews
Barbara Rosenkranz has criticized Austria's anti-Nazi law, which outlaws Holocaust-denial, as a curb on free speech.
By DPA Tags: Jewish World Holocaust denial Israel news AustriaAustrian far-right presidential candidate Barbara Rosenkranz drew sharp condemnation from the country's Jewish organizations Tuesday - who highlighted her controversial stance on Holocaust deniers.
Rosenkranz, 51, has criticized Austria's anti-Nazi law, which outlaws Holocaust-denial, as a curb on free speech.
Freedom Party politician Rosenkranz is the only other nominee besides Social Democratic incumbent Heinz Fischer. He is widely expected to win the April 25 election.
Rosenkranz's candidature was a "mockery of the 65,000 Austrian Jews killed in the Shoah," the Jewish communities said in a statement.
They called on the public, civic groups and other parties not to boycott Rosenkranz's bid - although she stands no reasonable chance of winning.
Pollsters predict that the Freedom Party nominee could collect over 20 per cent of votes. Other parties have not fielded candidates, citing Fischer's popularity.
In the 1980s, her husband Jakob Rosenkranz was active in a neo-Nazi party NDP, which has since been banned.
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
The only thing more stupid than denying the holocaust is making it illegal to do so. How can anyone be so shortsighted? Already I have heard Muslim groups invoking these laws when they want to shut down expression they don't like - as in the Danish cartoons. One what leg do we stand when we try to explain to these Muslims how freedom of speech is a value in our societies if we are so willing to toss it away at the request of Jews? The holocaust happened. But if I decide to say it didn't, or the Viet Nam war didn't, that is my right, and as a free Canadian I won't give it up for Muslims, Jews, Christians, or unbelievers.
Hate speech may be ugly, but as long as it does not call for the harming of any group to bar it is not acceptable Beyond that, though, it depends on what you call holocaust denial. Some time ago the death toll at Auschwitz was said to be double what it turned out to be. When it was pointed out the figure was very badly inflated, many called that holocaust denial. If one admits there was a holocaust, but questions some of the figures, would you make that illegal?
Thank you Okie for referring us to a YouTube video from American Rifleman on the true meaning of political left and right. We all know that American Rifleman, the monthly publication of the National Rifle Association is completely unbiased with respect to politics..."all" meaning all of us who believe the moon is made out of green cheese.
It is unacceptable, that any law prescribes, what I have to say about any old event.
If it were just about people pretending that history didn't happen or that the earth was flat, there wouldn't be an issue. People can, after all, be very stupid. But Holocaust denial is always accompanied by the charge that the Holocaust (one of the most extensively documented and conclusively proven crimes in the history of the human race) was invented by the Jews, and from there descends further and further into hate speech. It's not free speech. It's hate speech. Shut it down.
We do know that of the 13, million dead from Hitlers aggression, nearly half were Jews.
Undeniably why Israel wins and flourishes, while her enemies are in derision and chaos.
Austria isn't known for producing pro Israel discourse or affection for Jews. They did love their local boy, Hitler. You too?.
Fortunately, the words of her own mouth condemned her. Thank you sir, Shalom.
Unfortunately there has been a lot of confusion about Right and Left when it comes to politics. Left represents more government control and the least individual freedom. On the other hand, the further Right you go the less governmental control you have and the greater individual freedom. The most extremes are: total right = anarchy = no government at all and on total left = complete government control of every aspect of the individuals lives = Fascism, Communism, Totalitarianism, etc? Has it been confusion or misinformation? The following YouTube video makes it pretty understandable. The context is in American terms but the historical background is undeniable. http://www.youtube.com/user/TheAmericanRifleman?feature=mhw4#p/f/0/QBql09o2pnI
If Austrian jewish groups are upset at this "no hoper" running for office. I can only imagine how furious they where and how strongly they protested upon discovering a fanatical right wing racist thug was appointed foreign minister of Israel.
This person is in the mold of Bibi and his band of racists. Specially those ever so civil settlers.
Hopefully a lesson for all Jews around the world that right-wingers are not your friends
Is it admissible in the States to preach "burn all n*****s"? What do you think would happen if an organized group start campaigning for the expulsion of the Cucarachas from the US? or of the Japs? Just asking
Is 65,000 Austrian Jews killed in the Holocaust a correct figure? I thought there were more Jews than than in Vienna alone prior to WWII.
Holocaust denial is stupid, but banning free speech is even worse. Anti-discrimination laws should be enough to protect minority rights.
Let all those Austrian Jews make the move to Israel where they belong and let the Austrians do as they please. It's still possible to make it "THIS year in Jerusalem!"
It's a bizarre world you've got when supporting free speech is considered controversial.
Of course it is. How can one say a denial of the right to speak about something is not a curb on free speech?