Why Does Deborah Lipstadt Oppose Free Speech?

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
User avatar
JLAD Prove Me Wrong
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 466
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 8:35 pm

Why Does Deborah Lipstadt Oppose Free Speech?

Postby JLAD Prove Me Wrong » 3 years 5 days ago (Wed Jun 03, 2020 5:23 pm)

https://jewishlink.news/world-us/26268- ... ust-denial

"Lipstadt also told The Jewish Link that the First Amendment isn’t a reason for social media platforms such as Facebook to grant falsehoods digital space, and especially those that incite hate."

In this article, Deborah Lipstadt laments that fellow Jew Mark Zuckerberg for whatever reason, will not remove holocaust revisionism from the site. Although she tries to present herself as a free speech person, the fact that she wants holocaust truthers removed from Facebook, proves she does not support free speech. She has no regard for our country, free speech, or how history is done. My question is, why does she pretend to support free speech, when she doesn't?

"He is one of the most influential people in the world not to “get” that Holocaust denial is anti-Semitism.

The “he” in this case is Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg.

The person discussing Zuckerberg with The Jewish Link is Deborah Lipstadt, inarguably one of the world’s leading Holocaust scholars with a special expertise in Holocaust denial. Lipstadt was depicted on film in the movie “Denial,” which dramatized her experience facing the British legal system in proving that the Holocaust happened, against the inflammatory Holocaust denier David Irving.

Zuckerberg said during a podcast interview with the digital platform Recode Decode that he would not remove Facebook pages or posts denying the Holocaust. He said, instead, that he would push the post down so that it wouldn’t go viral.


“I don’t believe that our platform should take that down because I think there are things that different people get wrong,” Zuckerberg said during the podcast. “I don’t think that they’re intentionally getting it wrong.”

“It’s hard to impugn intent and to understand the intent,” added Zuckerberg. “I just don’t think that it is the right thing to say ‘we’re going to take someone off the platform if they get things wrong, even multiple times.’”

In an interview with The Jewish Link, Lipstadt said that Holocaust denial presents a very dark side of social media. “I love social media. I do my research on the internet. But it comes with a downside,” she said.

“Zuckerberg,” she added, “is an influential, important guy. He created a social media platform that is very important and has billions of users. This is not something to brush off.”

Lipstadt made it clear that by Zuckerberg saying that Holocaust deniers aren’t “intentionally getting it wrong,” he leaves the possibility open that they could be right. She clarified that it is only possible to be a Holocaust denier with full intentions. It is no accident.

Lipstadt is the author of the 1993 book “Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory.” The book has through the years become required reading on the subject of denial. In 2000, she was sued for libel by David Irving, a British “historian” whom she described as a denier in her book. Lipstadt and her British defense team won the landmark suit. It then became the plot of the 2016 film “Denial,” in which the character of Lipstadt was played by Rachel Weisz.

Today, Lipstadt is the Dorot Professor of Holocaust Studies at Emory University in Atlanta. She is also the author of the forthcoming “Antisemitism: Here and Now.” In a recent CNN article, she schooled her audience on the fact that Holocaust denial is not history, but rather anti-Semitism. “Holocaust denial is not about history. A form of anti-Semitism, it’s about attacking, discrediting and demonizing Jews,” she explained.

Lipstadt told The Jewish Link that Holocaust deniers are not the latest members of the “Earth Is Flat Society” or the “Elvis-Is-Still-Alive” club. They are, she said, white supremacists and anti-Semites. “Their agenda is to reinforce and spread the very hatred that produced the Holocaust,” she said.

But can Zuckerberg or any social media platform stuff Holocaust denial back into the bottle and put a cork on it once it comes out?

“You can try,” she told The Jewish Link. “But it is difficult. I think what Zuckerberg said shows a level of failure to understand what Holocaust denial is all about. The failure here is not a mistaken view of history, but a failure to understand that Holocaust denial is essential anti-Semitism. It’s all about false statements that Jews made up the Holocaust to get money or made it up to get a state and get the Allies to do their bidding. Then they’ll tell you that they got Germany to accept the responsibility for this crime, and so it shows the power of the Jews. This is anti-Semitism in a pseudo-intellectual historical guise.”

She called the Holocaust deniers “wolves in sheep’s clothing” who try to come across as “respectable academics.”

In a TED Talk she gave on the subject, Lipstadt told the audience in succinct terms that “there are facts, opinions and there are lies. Deniers want to take their lies, dress them up as opinions and then those opinions encroach on the facts.”

Social media, she would add, “for all the gifts it has given us,” has also allowed the difference between facts and lies to be flattened.”

Lipstadt also told The Jewish Link that the First Amendment isn’t a reason for social media platforms such as Facebook to grant falsehoods digital space, and especially those that incite hate. “The First Amendment speaks of the right of an individual to be free of government’s control of freedom of speech,” she told The Jewish Link. “It says nothing about a private entity’s obligation to give everyone free speech. Do you have a right to demand of the New York Times that they must print your letter because to do otherwise would stifle your freedom of speech? Clearly not.”

Zuckerberg would go on to walk back part of his Recode interview when he sent an email to the tech site reporter who interviewed him saying, “I personally find Holocaust denial deeply offensive, and I absolutely didn’t intend to defend the intent of people who deny that.”

Zuckerberg would also get recent support from his sister Randi Zuckerberg, who denounced Holocaust deniers, but said that keeping them off of social media “will not make them go away.” Randi Zuckerberg served as director of marketing for Facebook and is the founder and CEO of Zuckerberg Media.

A Jewish community activist herself, Zuckerberg has suggested that a debate would be appropriate on the deniers’ right to a social media platform.

But, Lipstadt noted, that there’s no debating the lies of a denier. “We’ve been taught everything is open for debate,” she said. “But that’s not the case here. There are certain things that are true. These are indisputable facts, objective truths.”

And those truths, she added, must be defended now.

“Later will be too late.”"
If your beliefs cannot stand up to your own sincere scrutiny and skeptical evaluation, they are not worth having.

https://freespeechmonika.wordpress.com/ ... t-details/

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10395
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Why Does Deborah Lipstadt Oppose Free Speech?

Postby Hannover » 3 years 5 days ago (Wed Jun 03, 2020 6:57 pm)

"Why Does Deborah Lipstadt Oppose Free Speech?"

Simple.

Her beloved, yet ridiculously impossible 'holocaust' narrative does not stand up to scientific, rational, and logical scrutiny.
Hence, according to her twisted way of thinking, it's necessary to stop free speech conveying those basic facts.

Only lies require censorship.

- Hannover

Revisionists are just the messengers, the absurd impossibility of the 'holocaust' storyline is the message.
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

User avatar
Webmaster
Administration
Administration
Posts: 466
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 10:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Why Does Deborah Lipstadt Oppose Free Speech?

Postby Webmaster » 3 years 5 days ago (Wed Jun 03, 2020 7:08 pm)

JLAD: Your original post has been modified. Whenever you quote a large body of text from another website you must use the quotation feature. This lets the reader understand that the text they are reading is from another source.
Your previous posts on this forum show that you are familiar with this feature. Please use it when it is appropriate to do so.

Thanks.

Webmaster

User avatar
Lamprecht
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2814
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:32 pm

Re: Why Does Deborah Lipstadt Oppose Free Speech?

Postby Lamprecht » 3 years 5 days ago (Wed Jun 03, 2020 8:44 pm)

From the article:
She clarified that it is only possible to be a Holocaust denier with full intentions.

Quite obviously we have a mentally unwell individual that believes they can read minds and establish the intent of people they have never met.
Deborah Lipstadt is a liar and obfuscater. She reveals this in her recently published book which I referenced in this thread:

Racist Zionist Deborah Lipstadt attacks revisionists in her new book: "Antisemitism: Here and Now"
viewtopic.php?t=12271

She will gladly lie to push her agenda. Here is an exact quote from her book:
For deniers to be right, all survivors would have to be wrong

That's a bold statement, is it not? It can be rejected on many levels, but notably the very first so-called "denier" was himself interned in the camps, and is therefore a "survivor." Paul Rassinier is labelled the "father of Holocaust denial" on his Wikipedia page. He was physically assaulted by the Germans, beaten and tortured after his arrest, which resulted in him later being deported to Buchenwald concentration camp.

Lipstadt can not argue from ignorance while claiming to be some sort of expert. She deliberately attacks a strawman version of "deniers" on purpose because the truth does not matter to her. There is either malicious intent to deceive or mental illness at play with Deborah Lipstadt, perhaps a mixture of both.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principle is contempt prior to investigation."
— Herbert Spencer


NOTE: I am taking a leave of absence from revisionism to focus on other things. At this point, the ball is in their court to show the alleged massive pits full of human remains at the so-called "extermination camps." After 8 decades they still refuse to do this. I wonder why...

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10395
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Why Does Deborah Lipstadt Oppose Free Speech?

Postby Hannover » 3 years 5 days ago (Wed Jun 03, 2020 8:57 pm)

Lipstadt:
For deniers to be right, all survivors would have to be wrong

Notice that she never tells us exactly & completely what such "survivors" actually say. Which, as we know, are bizarre claims that are impossible & contradictory.

Notice that he does not tell us which "survivors" she considers to be the most reliable and why.

And how can there be multitudes of "survivors" when the narrative states that "the Germans tried to kill every Jew they could get their hands on."

- Hannover

The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it.”
-George Orwell
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

User avatar
borjastick
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 3233
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 5:52 am
Location: Europe

Re: Why Does Deborah Lipstadt Oppose Free Speech?

Postby borjastick » 3 years 5 days ago (Thu Jun 04, 2020 1:20 am)

She uses over and over the word Denier it is designed to brainwash anyone who has a light grasp on the matter that anyone with any opinion that doesn't mirror hers and that of the holocaust industry is a jew hater.

What she doesn't want is any investigation and thought on the matter at all. Claiming Denial means anti-semitism is her first line of defense. To call someone an anti semite is the ideal and perfect answer for her. The problem she really has is that she knows full well that any rational pursuit of the truth about what really happened in the claimed holocaust period will absolutely expose them as liars and that in turn will cause massive repercussions for jews around the world.
'Of the four million Jews under Nazi control in WW2, six million died and alas only five million survived.'

'We don't need evidence, we have survivors' - israeli politician

Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1193
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Why Does Deborah Lipstadt Oppose Free Speech?

Postby Werd » 3 years 5 days ago (Thu Jun 04, 2020 1:53 am)

JLAD Prove Me Wrong wrote:https://jewishlink.news/world-us/26268-deborah-lipstadt-zuckerberg-doesn-t-get-holocaust-denial

"Lipstadt also told The Jewish Link that the First Amendment isn’t a reason for social media platforms such as Facebook to grant falsehoods digital space, and especially those that incite hate."

In this article, Deborah Lipstadt laments that fellow Jew Mark Zuckerberg for whatever reason, will not remove holocaust revisionism from the site. Although she tries to present herself as a free speech person, the fact that she wants holocaust truthers removed from Facebook, proves she does not support free speech. She has no regard for our country, free speech, or how history is done. My question is, why does she pretend to support free speech, when she doesn't?

"He is one of the most influential people in the world not to “get” that Holocaust denial is anti-Semitism.

The “he” in this case is Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg.

The person discussing Zuckerberg with The Jewish Link is Deborah Lipstadt, inarguably one of the world’s leading Holocaust scholars with a special expertise in Holocaust denial. Lipstadt was depicted on film in the movie “Denial,” which dramatized her experience facing the British legal system in proving that the Holocaust happened, against the inflammatory Holocaust denier David Irving.

Zuckerberg said during a podcast interview with the digital platform Recode Decode that he would not remove Facebook pages or posts denying the Holocaust. He said, instead, that he would push the post down so that it wouldn’t go viral.


“I don’t believe that our platform should take that down because I think there are things that different people get wrong,” Zuckerberg said during the podcast. “I don’t think that they’re intentionally getting it wrong.”

“It’s hard to impugn intent and to understand the intent,” added Zuckerberg. “I just don’t think that it is the right thing to say ‘we’re going to take someone off the platform if they get things wrong, even multiple times.’”

In an interview with The Jewish Link, Lipstadt said that Holocaust denial presents a very dark side of social media. “I love social media. I do my research on the internet. But it comes with a downside,” she said.

“Zuckerberg,” she added, “is an influential, important guy. He created a social media platform that is very important and has billions of users. This is not something to brush off.”

Lipstadt made it clear that by Zuckerberg saying that Holocaust deniers aren’t “intentionally getting it wrong,” he leaves the possibility open that they could be right. She clarified that it is only possible to be a Holocaust denier with full intentions. It is no accident.

Lipstadt is the author of the 1993 book “Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory.” The book has through the years become required reading on the subject of denial. In 2000, she was sued for libel by David Irving, a British “historian” whom she described as a denier in her book. Lipstadt and her British defense team won the landmark suit. It then became the plot of the 2016 film “Denial,” in which the character of Lipstadt was played by Rachel Weisz.

Today, Lipstadt is the Dorot Professor of Holocaust Studies at Emory University in Atlanta. She is also the author of the forthcoming “Antisemitism: Here and Now.” In a recent CNN article, she schooled her audience on the fact that Holocaust denial is not history, but rather anti-Semitism. “Holocaust denial is not about history. A form of anti-Semitism, it’s about attacking, discrediting and demonizing Jews,” she explained.

Lipstadt told The Jewish Link that Holocaust deniers are not the latest members of the “Earth Is Flat Society” or the “Elvis-Is-Still-Alive” club. They are, she said, white supremacists and anti-Semites. “Their agenda is to reinforce and spread the very hatred that produced the Holocaust,” she said.

But can Zuckerberg or any social media platform stuff Holocaust denial back into the bottle and put a cork on it once it comes out?

“You can try,” she told The Jewish Link. “But it is difficult. I think what Zuckerberg said shows a level of failure to understand what Holocaust denial is all about. The failure here is not a mistaken view of history, but a failure to understand that Holocaust denial is essential anti-Semitism. It’s all about false statements that Jews made up the Holocaust to get money or made it up to get a state and get the Allies to do their bidding. Then they’ll tell you that they got Germany to accept the responsibility for this crime, and so it shows the power of the Jews. This is anti-Semitism in a pseudo-intellectual historical guise.”

She called the Holocaust deniers “wolves in sheep’s clothing” who try to come across as “respectable academics.”

In a TED Talk she gave on the subject, Lipstadt told the audience in succinct terms that “there are facts, opinions and there are lies. Deniers want to take their lies, dress them up as opinions and then those opinions encroach on the facts.”

Social media, she would add, “for all the gifts it has given us,” has also allowed the difference between facts and lies to be flattened.”

Lipstadt also told The Jewish Link that the First Amendment isn’t a reason for social media platforms such as Facebook to grant falsehoods digital space, and especially those that incite hate. “The First Amendment speaks of the right of an individual to be free of government’s control of freedom of speech,” she told The Jewish Link. “It says nothing about a private entity’s obligation to give everyone free speech. Do you have a right to demand of the New York Times that they must print your letter because to do otherwise would stifle your freedom of speech? Clearly not.”

Zuckerberg would go on to walk back part of his Recode interview when he sent an email to the tech site reporter who interviewed him saying, “I personally find Holocaust denial deeply offensive, and I absolutely didn’t intend to defend the intent of people who deny that.”

Zuckerberg would also get recent support from his sister Randi Zuckerberg, who denounced Holocaust deniers, but said that keeping them off of social media “will not make them go away.” Randi Zuckerberg served as director of marketing for Facebook and is the founder and CEO of Zuckerberg Media.

A Jewish community activist herself, Zuckerberg has suggested that a debate would be appropriate on the deniers’ right to a social media platform.

But, Lipstadt noted, that there’s no debating the lies of a denier. “We’ve been taught everything is open for debate,” she said. “But that’s not the case here. There are certain things that are true. These are indisputable facts, objective truths.”

And those truths, she added, must be defended now.

“Later will be too late.”"

Free speech is one thing.
Hate speech is another.

Opposing the latter doesn't mean you oppose the former. See? Contradiction erased. BTFO racists. LOL.

In all seriousness, this whole "hate speech" thing doesn't exist in the constitution. It's a leftist concept that was concocted by people who pretend to care about American values while draping themselves in the flag.

User avatar
stinky
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 301
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2018 10:59 pm

Re: Why Does Deborah Lipstadt Oppose Free Speech?

Postby stinky » 3 years 5 days ago (Thu Jun 04, 2020 3:11 am)

It's pretty straightforward.
(((They))) are champions of free speech, excluding anything that (((they))) don't like, which is "hate speech".
So long as you subordinate yourself to (((their))) whims, you're safe.

In this instance specifically, the attractive, courageous, intelligent Deborah Lipshitz generously points out that "falsehoods" (certified so by her or other (((completely independent & unbiased))) arbiters) are outside of the purview of the First Amendment.

If unsure, always ask. Is it good for the jews?
If yes, it's "free speech"
If no, it's "hate speech"
Anyone objecting to this mandate is antisemitic. A tortured slave to their irrational hatred.
It's easier to fool someone than to convince them that they have been fooled

User avatar
Lamprecht
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2814
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:32 pm

Re: Why Does Deborah Lipstadt Oppose Free Speech?

Postby Lamprecht » 3 years 4 days ago (Thu Jun 04, 2020 9:29 am)

borjastick wrote:She uses over and over the word Denier

And always attacking a strawman in the process.
It's a strawman encountered far too often. Juergen Graf recently made mincemeat of this nonsensical assertion in his book on Auschwitz eyewitness testimonies. To wit:
The “Many Thousands of Witnesses, Survivors, Victims and Perpetrators”
No revisionist has ever claimed that the witnesses and survivors of the concentration camps, of which there were indeed many thousands, had lied throughout in all instances. It’s not about former concentration-camp detainees in general, however, but about those who claim to have attended homicidal gassings, and there weren’t “many thousands” of them, but quite a small number. As far as their testimonies pertain to Auschwitz, the most important of these witnesses are presented and quoted in this book.
From:
Auschwitz: Eyewitness Reports and Perpetrator Confessions of the Holocaust — 30 Gas-Chamber Witnesses Scrutinized
http://holocausthandbooks.com/index.php ... page_id=36

The vast majority of "survivors" do not claim anything exceptional in their testimony with regards to "denial" here. Individual, unverifiable, and random acts of cruelty are common in the "survivor" literature, but these are mostly concerned with personal accounts during a bloody and chaotic war and not regarding any overall Third Reich policy that is disputed. Eyewitness testimony is understood to be an imperfect metric and subject to personal exaggeration, biases, and omissions that are not necessarily a result of deliberate intent to deceive. Stating a falsehood is not a lie by definition if you actually believe it is true.

"Deniers" acknowledge that the Third Reich had anti-Jewish policies that involved segregation, deportation, and camps for the purpose of labor and internment. Only a tiny % of the "survivor" testimonies claim to have witnessed anything that is actually specifically disputed by "deniers".

Insofar as the opinion "well, I did not see anything of the sort myself, but I believe it happened!" is a useful qualifier, it certainly is not at least in regards to historiography. Once you create this label "survivor" which comes with it [financial] incentives (reparations + more) you have completely destroyed the validity of using this label as a metric for anything meaningful. Today, you could invent a vague event and anyone who was alive and in a general place during a period can get paid reparations for it, you will naturally find yourself a long line of fast-buck artists even if your intentions are benevolent.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principle is contempt prior to investigation."
— Herbert Spencer


NOTE: I am taking a leave of absence from revisionism to focus on other things. At this point, the ball is in their court to show the alleged massive pits full of human remains at the so-called "extermination camps." After 8 decades they still refuse to do this. I wonder why...

EtienneSC
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 735
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: Why Does Deborah Lipstadt Oppose Free Speech?

Postby EtienneSC » 3 years 4 days ago (Thu Jun 04, 2020 1:53 pm)

Deborah Lipstadt supports some key aspects of free speech. She opposes criminalization of revisionism for example and has said so publicly. We should give her credit for that. Not everyone does it.

Archie
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 512
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2020 12:44 am

Re: Why Does Deborah Lipstadt Oppose Free Speech?

Postby Archie » 2 years 9 months ago (Sat Aug 15, 2020 10:21 am)

EtienneSC wrote:Deborah Lipstadt supports some key aspects of free speech. She opposes criminalization of revisionism for example and has said so publicly. We should give her credit for that. Not everyone does it.

Or at least she pretends to oppose this. It may be a calculated position. She knows it's bad optics to come out for overt government censorship, especially as an American. And it would also look like she's shutting down her opponents out of fear. Either way, she doesn't seem to have any problem with private censorship by universities and corporations.

Here she is arguing against criminalizing holocaust denial at Oxford.



This entire debate is a farce because everyone just takes turns roundly condemning holocaust denial. It's just a show. Of all people, they got Lipstadt and Richard Evans to argue against criminalization. Lol. I hardly expect them to invite Germar Rudolf but if this was meant to be serious they could have at least got someone like Christopher Hitchens or Noam Chomsky. The whole thing just looked like an excuse for these holohoaxers to pretend they support open debate.


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests