David Duke: My Proof to the Czech People that My Arrest is a Suppression of Human Rights
Why I am not guilty of any “Thought Crimes” in the Czech Republic
By Dr. David Duke
After jailing me in violation of my human rights, I have no personal interest in visiting the Czech Republic again, but if it is decided that my human rights of conscience and speech will be violated by continuation of charging me with crimes related to free speech, I will certainly come back to Czech Republic to defend myself and to defend that most precious freedom of free speech. Freedom of thought and speech is the freedom upon which that all other human rights rest. If it becomes necessary for me to return to defend myself I will do so. In the unfortunate media frenzy that will ensue, I will expose to the people of your fine country and to the world — how human rights are being trampled on – in a fashion completely unworthy of the heroes of your great history.
Every true Czech should value freedom of speech, especially after decades of brutal suppression of freedom of speech by the Bolsheviks. How many of you; how many of your fathers and mothers endured imprisonment, torture or even death for exercising their God-given human right of freedom of speech. They stood up bravely no matter how the communists tried to criminalize their free speech. Slowly, the same kinds of human rights violations are creeping into your land and across Europe. Journalists are always the first to defend their own freedom of speech, but why the silence about my freedom.
Indeed your country’s greatest hero, Jan Hus, is an example of how suppression of free thought and speech is a heinous violation of human rights not worthy of the ancient establishment back in 1415 and not worthy of the Czech people today. For that matter, the rights of free conscience and speech are not just limited to the Czech Republic but are universal.
Furthermore, I am not guilty of the specific charge against me in any capacity. Here are the reasons why.
1) A book I wrote in the United States in the mid-nineties and in English can hardly be a crime in the Czech Republic. The police complaint says that My Awakening, a book I originally wrote in English in the USA in the mid 1990s is why I have been charged. In fact, I wrote it the 1990s before any current laws, and I wrote it in English obviously for an English speaking audience.
2) The book was published in the Czech Republic by an independent publisher over whom I had no control or influence and who, in fact, was critical of parts of my book. Years ago My Awakening was published in Hungary and at that time I gave up my rights to the book in Eastern Europe of the EU. I did not translate this book into Czech nor cause it to be translated. I did not publish the book nor cause it to be published.
3) The Government has publicly stated clearly that the actual publisher of the book has broken no Czech laws. As the publisher is innocent, so I am also innocent. I, who wrote the book years ago in America, and in the English language, I did not translate the book into the Czech language, nor seek the translation of the book into the Czech language. How can I be said to be guilty of crime when I did not even publish a book that the government itself says is not criminal?
4) Furthermore, even if I had written the book in the Czech Republic itself and in the Czech language and would have published the book myself, (which I did not) it clearly would not violate any laws in the Czech Republic or in Europe for that matter. It must be noted that in my writings I wrote in English in 1995 never “denied” the Holocaust.
Only 1 chapter out of 42 chapters in My Awakening even touches the Holocaust issue, and that single chapter is not “Holocaust denial” but simply a plea for freedom of speech on this issue just like any other, and opposition to the idea that academics should be jailed for their historical opinions. I state very clearly in my writings that I believe that terrible atrocities and murders occurred against the Jewish people. I even candidly state that the Holocaust may certainly have happened exactly as some leading popular Holocaust historians say, but that historical truth is only arrived at ultimately from freedom of speech.
If an academic can be threatened with loss of his university position or even with imprisonment for his researched opinions, a climate is created that hinders search for historical truth. It is still hard for me to believe that a person in a supposedly free country can be jailed simply for his opinions about aspects of an historical event, and literally no one to my knowledge has been prosecuted or imprisoned for questioning aspects of any other historical event other than this one.
5) The one chapter in My Awakening does not constitute “Holocaust Denial.” In that single chapter I do state that historians who are called “revisionists” as well as show that many mainstream Jewish and non-Jewish historians have had differing opinions about aspects of what is called the Holocaust. I make it clear that these opinions are not mine, but are those of revisionists of which I am not one. By doing this I argued that the jailing and persecution of these men is a terrible blight on our societies which pride ourselves on freedom of speech and thought. In the book, I also make clear my strong criticism of the National Socialist regime in these human rights matters.
6) As the Independent Czech publisher is not guilty of any crime, so I am not guilty as well. My original writings in English in the 1990s on this subject are very similar to what the independent publisher does on the matter. As the publisher published my writings, and made clear that my writings were not the publisher’s, I do the very same thing in my text. I simply recount some of the revisionist positions and argue that many of their positions don’t constitute holocaust denial but constitute simply offer legal academic debate on aspects of this terrible period. I also show that many mainstream popular writers of the Holocaust have also shown a dramatic change of position on many material aspects of what is called the “Holocaust”. Quoting writers such as Jean Claude Pressac who was sponsored by the famous anti-Nazi Klarsfeld Foundation, for instance, on his dramatic reductions of deaths from Auschwitz does not constitute holocaust denial. In truth, if someone is prosecuted for holocaust denial for quoting what Jean Claude Pressac himself wrote — then he, Prassac and many Jewish mainstream writers must be prosecuted themselves because they have written things that have dramatically countered previous versions of mainstream Holocaust positions.
In truth I don’t even do what Pressac did, I don’t say what he said, I simply point out what revisionists say about these matters, and I don’t even say that Pressac was necessarily right in his data. So if the government says the publisher is innocent of any law violation, then I am as well, because I simply quote what others say, and I clearly and powerfully condemn the crimes against Jews. My writings do not say the Holocaust didn’t happen nor in any way deny the Holocaust as the human tragedy it was. Perhaps, the real reason I get into trouble is that I contrast the flood of movies, TV programs, documentaries, books, plays, remembrances of the Holocaust as compared to that all historians agree was much bigger slaughter of human beings by Bolshevism.
7) I did not come to the Czech Republic to promote the book, but to speak at Charles University, and even if my critics say that I had promoted the book, how can it be a crime to promote a book that the Government has found to be legal? The government prosecutor has suggested that I came to the Czech Republic to “promote the book.” My media interviews before my arrest also prove the fact that I did not come to promote books for I made no promotion of my books whatsoever in those interviews. In fact, the purpose of my trip was to fulfill a speaking invitation at Charles University. I have lectured at over 300 universities and I considered this lecture to be one of the most important of my life as the history and tradition and importance of Charles University is famous throughout Europe and the World. Even though my trip to Prague was not to promote the book but give a lecture, (you can read or hear the lecture on my website, DavidDuke.com), how much sense does it make to allege that it is criminal to speak about a book that has already been deemed by the state as legal?
Certainly in light of these clear facts, I am not guilty of any crime in the Czech Republic, but have been a victim of government efforts to restrict my speech and imprison me unjustly. In short, the obvious truth is that I have committed no human rights crime, but the efforts of a few men in government to imprison me for my opinions and beliefs is truly a crime against human rights. In Den Hague, men are prosecuted for conspiracy to deny human rights. Have not my human rights been violated here. I leave it the public to decide who is the real criminal here; a man like myself who consistently speaks against violence and opposes violations of all human rights, or the government who attempts to put people into prison for up to three years for speaking their conscience? The only ones guilty of criminal human rights crimes here are those who try to suppress the most basic human right of free speech and conscience.
I am hopeful true advocates of human rights and justice in the Czech legal system will realize these facts and see that justice is done.
My thanks to all the Czech people, who whether they agree or disagree with my opinions are standing up for the right of free speech and against the immoral jailing of people for their opinions.
May God Bless You,
Dr. David Duke