Free speech in Germany? You can deny the Holocaust in a small group, but for heaven's sake do not call Greens politician Claudia Roth "disgusting" in a private email.

The German Federal Constitutional Court can be a moody institution with at times queer decisions when it comes to the question of what constitutes free speech.

In November 2011 they delivered, by German standards, a real master piece. Contrary to § 130 STGB the Constitutional Court saw the denial of the Holocaust by a known Neonazi (!) protected by free speech! Their decision was published months later and was met with astonishment in the press.

The Suddeutsche Zeitung was a tad puzzled. Denying the Holocaust is protected by free speech as long as it is done in a small group!?! Come again.

The reasoning of the Court went along this winding path: Since the denial of the Holocaust viewed as such is "considered proven untrue is not covered by the freedom of expression", "in the overall context of the respective essays, however, the respective Holocaust denying statements are inextricably linked to expressions of opinion." The decision of the Constitutional Court explains why: "The decisive criterion whether a public dissemination exists, is by accepted understanding always that a publication is made available to a larger, uncontrollable group of persons."

If you consider this to be arbitrary you should first listen to the exalted standards of its chief judge Mr Vosskuhle:

"It is part of the self-understanding and dignity of many outstanding lawyers not to have to praise themselves."

Quite a lofty statement by any standards if you consider that he still teaches at a university and enjoys a double paycheck.

So far so bad good.

Enter a person who had sent a private e-mail addressed to a single (!) person in which he discribed the Greens politician Claudia Roth as "disgusting" (ekelhaft):

"How long should the oath (... damage from the German people turn away, ..) from Merkel be supported by devote mayors and landrats? Do not you ever feel cowardly? Or does the humane extermination of the German people begin here by means of a complete passage? So it was in any case longed for by this disgusting Claudia Roth in a talkshow!"

(Google translate)

„Wie lange soll eigentlich noch der Eidbruch (...Schaden vom deutschen Volke abwenden,..) von Merkel durch devote Bürgermeister und Landräte unterstützt werden? Kriegt hier vor Feigheit wieder mal keiner sein Maul auf?! Oder beginnt hier die humane Ausrottung des deutschen Volkes durch vollständige Durchrassung? So wurde es jedenfalls von dieser ekelhaften Claudia Roth in einer Talkshow herbeigesehnt!“

He was fined € 3,000.00. Here is the lovely, sexy Claudia Roth. Judge for yourself.

Claudia Roth in unadulterated splendor.
(Source: Clemens Bilan/Getty Images Europe)

Google Images offers more eye candy of Claudia.

The CC refused to accept the case in September 2017.

This is no single incident where the Red Inquisition does not give a hoot to free speech. There was the famous Brosa case, or this here:

Admittedly, the terms Karlsruhe, Germany, and the Federal Constitutional Court lack the sex factor, but make up with double standards on what constitutes free speech.

The Gatestone Institute summed it up just days ago:

Germany: Full Censorship Now Official

This should be required reading in Karlsruhe:

In Free Speech We Find Tolerance and Prosperity

But then again, the German Constitutional Court perhaps rather subscribes to Bourdieu:

"The most successful ideological effects are those which have no need of words, but ask no more than a complicitous silence.”