Holocaust revisionism should be legal

The absolute truth should never fear investigation. On the contrary " that which is absolute truth should actively encourage investigation, confident in the knowledge that all close and objective detail would check out and indeed prove to be the absolute truth that it claims to be. When anything fears investigation this should serve as huge red flag. When something fears investigation the most obvious question is "why"? The simple answer to that is anything which fears investigation fears some sort of exposure. If it did not then, as I"ve said, it would invite investigation and discussion and not conspire to make investigation or even asking the "wrong" question a criminal offence. When states send their own citizens to prison for asking a ('wrong') question about or investigating an alleged historical event " then something is very wrong indeed. Let us now look at a sample of countries in the laughably named "free world" in which any revisionism, disallowed questions, independent research and presentation of discovered facts is apparently such a terrible crime that a man or women can be thrown in jail and face total ruination. And for why? For doing what history and science depends and thrives on in all other cases " revising and study and presenting findings for discussion and information. These are not terrorists, paedophiles and murderers. They are very ordinary men and women who have taken an interest in this, researched it for themselves, and who simply discuss or present what they have found. These are not people that are plotting some super- secret genocide against anyone " they are writers, historians, authors, intellectuals and many ordinary men with wives and families. * In Romania, Emergency Ordinance No. 31 of March 13, 2002 prohibits Holocaust denial In Poland, Holocaust denial is punishable by law. While Holocaust denial is not explicitly illegal in the Netherlands, the courts consider it a form of spreading hatred and therefore an offence In Luxembourg, Article 457-3 of the Criminal Code, Act of 19 July 1997 outlaws Holocaust denial The Parliament of Hungary declared the denial or trivialization of the Holocaust a crime punishable by up to three years' imprisonment on February 23, 2010 In Germany, Volksverhetzung ("incitement of the people") is a concept in German criminal law that bans incitement to hatred against segments of the population. It often applies to (though not limited to) trials relating to Holocaust denial in Germany. In France, the Gayssot Act, voted for on July 13, 1990, makes it illegal to question the existence of crimes that fall in 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 In the Czech Republic, Holocaust denial is illegal. In May 2007 Ekrem Ajanovic, a Bosniak MP in the Bosnian Parliament proposed a legislation on criminalizing the denial of Holocaust In Belgium, Holocaust denial was made illegal in 1995. Austria. National Socialism Prohibition Law (1947, amendments of 1992) whoever denies, grossly plays down, approves or tries to excuse the National Socialist genocide or other National Socialist crimes against humanity in a print publication, in broadcast or other media will be punished with imprisonment from one to up to ten years. While Australia lacks a specific law against Holocaust denial, Holocaust denial is prosecuted in Australia under various laws against "hate speech" and "racial vilification" ** This is just a sampling of the persecution of any man or women faces that dares do their own research, think for themselves, or who dares to show their research to other supposedly free adults to let them measure the quality of it (or otherwise). There is simply no genuine ethical, moral or intellectual basis to making criminals out of grown adults who dare to think for themselves and who seek to research this period of history. Indeed the biggest crime is that this IS a crime in so many modern Western countries. Why does it fear investigation so very much it must hold the threat of prison over anyone that has the audacity to calmly and fairly do their own research and thinking? They refer to it as 'denial', but when this is broken down, what it really means is any research or opinion that runs contrary to the demanded narrative in these three areas; The numbers said to be executed The primary method said to be used to execute(gas chambers) The existence or otherwise of a formal programme and policy of a literal and actual genocide. Deviating from the allowed narrative in any of those three areas would, in the above named countries, very likely see you jailed. This is not a just application of law - it is clearly against the spirit of justice. If the findings and research of the revisionists is so evidently false, and if the permitted narrative is absolute truth, then there should be no issue in encouraging people to go research freely for themselves, look at all information and make up their own minds as a free and sentient human being. When a state makes it illegal to do so on a matter from history, then anyone who is sent to prison is simply a victim of an INjustice system at work. And here's the stunning hypocrisy of it. ** The European court of human rights (ECHR) has ruled that a Turkish politician should not have been prosecuted for denying that the mass killing of Armenians by Ottoman Turkey in 1915 was a genocide. In a landmark free speech ruling, the ECHR judges ruled by 10 votes to seven that Doğu Perin"ek, chairman of Turkey"s Patriotic party, should never have been convicted of racial discrimination by a Swiss court for saying that the "Armenian genocide is a great international lie". Perin"ek was convicted and fined in 2007 after a series of press conferences on the topic, which the ECHR ruled was an infringement on his right to free speech. In its judgment, the court said Perin"ek"s statements related to an issue of "public interest and did not amount to a call for hatred or intolerance " and could not be regarded as affecting the dignity of the members of the Armenian community to the point of requiring a criminal law response". The court made a clear distinction with Holocaust denial, whose specific history meant it could always be "seen as a form of incitement to racial hatred" in certain countries. ** http://www.theguardian.com... On one hand you have the ECHR ruling that this Turkish politician had his right to free speech violated, while from the other corner of their mouth they openly speak about continuing to violate the free thought, expression and speech of those that may have a different view of this alleged holocaust of Jews. Whether you are even interested in WW2 and history is almost moot here. What really matters is that people should not risk going to prison or be persecuted for behaving in a non violent manner, and they should not find a squad of police officers taking their door down simply because they have researched a given time in history and as a result may have some valid questions that they want to ask, and they may have valid information that they desire grown adults to look at and make up their own mind. Is this really 2015 when we have intelligent and independent thinkers hunted down, persecuted and jailed for being what appears to be more something akin to a religious heretic? For no more than research, thoughts, words and ideas? And as I keep saying if those thoughts are so inaccurate and their research so easily debunked, then the usual and normal thing to do would be to first welcome it and then trying to debunk or refute it. This is what we would expect to do when anyone brought forth a different idea or new research on a historical or scientific matter.