View Full Version : Holocaust Deniers Convention (Light Refreshments Served)
Prince of the Poodles
12-12-2006, 22:01
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,236014,00.html
In a wierd sort of way, I find it ironic that such a meeting could be hosted in Iran but not in many Western countries.
Certainly the evidence for the holocaust is strong enough that denying it doesnt need to be made illegal?
I don't understand why it is illegal, if you want to belive that the holocaust doesnt exist, then whats the rpoblem, in a way a debate is quite useful on the subject, and many european countries would be too touchy to even start a debate about it...:2thumbsup:
English assassin
12-12-2006, 22:46
Certainly the evidence for the holocaust is strong enough that denying it doesnt need to be made illegal?
Tongue in cheek, I'd rather see the denial of natural selection made illegal, certainly. (I've been away for a bit, forgive me if we've moved on from that one.)
Although as a general principle I would agree that the way to deal with any stupid or malevolent viewpoint is to bring it out in the open and then squash it, I think there are two arguments, one general and one specific, that could support holocaust denial being a crime. The general one is that the global population do not seem to share my faith in rational argument, and probably don't have the advantages we do in getting access to reasonably relaible information. Sure, we know that a holocaust denial conference in Europe could only be half a dozen crazies, but what if it gets reported in, I don't know, Indonesia. They probably know as much about the history of the holocaust as I know about their history, which i am afraid to say is next to zero.
The specific reason is that a large number is people will be caused very real pain by allowing groups to go about shouting that the holocaust didn't happen. Rightly or wrongly there are certain kinds of offence we are not allowed to cause (racial abuse would be another).
For me the balance is still on the side of allowing the deniers their right to free speech, but I can see why other countries feel differently.
Big King Sanctaphrax
12-12-2006, 22:53
Woo! EA is back.
I don't think banning expressing a particular viewpoint is ever wise, unless it is explicitly inciting violence.
Welcome back, EA!
As for the conference, one question. Can they keep David Duke? Seriously?
KukriKhan
12-12-2006, 23:02
Isn't the whole point of having such a convention (especially one without holocaust survivors present) to create a seemingly civilized pretext to further the view:
"Since the so-called holocaust either never existed or was exaggerated, then one of the reasons for the creation of Israel is removed or reduced." ?
Then, 15-20 years from now, when Iran introduces a UN resolution to abolish the state of Israel due to illegitimate founding, it won't be immediately laughed at/ignored?
Plant a seed. Then take 'the long view'. Strategy.
(Utter ballox, o'course, but hardly a new plan).
Ironside
12-12-2006, 23:50
I don't know, Indonesia. They probably know as much about the history of the holocaust as I know about their history, which i am afraid to say is next to zero.
Only a minor note combining holocaust and Indonesia that made quite fitting to your point.
Our social studies teacher was on vacation in Indonesia and there he encountered hotel Swastika, with the symbol very publically viewed.
Watchman
12-12-2006, 23:53
The angled Nazi Hakenkreutz or the godawfully ancient sun symbol they were ripping off, though ?
As Auntie put it:... (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6173941.stm)
Mr Ahmadinejad has repeatedly downplayed the extent of the Holocaust, describing it as a myth used to justify the existence of Israel and oppression of the Palestinians. He has called for an end to the Israeli state.
Many Iranians must be wondering why they have the right to deny the Holocaust with impunity, but not to question their own leaders without risking jail, our correspondent says.
In recent months, newspapers have been closed, journalists jailed and students penalised for engaging in any sort of political activity in Iran.
Reenk Roink
12-13-2006, 01:21
Just despicable... :shame:
David Duke? Isn't the KKK a WASP only group? Iranians are defiantly neither Anglo-Saxon or Protestant. Or have the Klukkers gone to "only black and Jew." hating.
Only a minor note combining holocaust and Indonesia that made quite fitting to your point.
Our social studies teacher was on vacation in Indonesia and there he encountered hotel Swastika, with the symbol very publically viewed.
The swasticka is a symbol for good luck. It was commonly found and used in the late 1800's and 1900's. It's even found on alot of letters home to loved ones during WWI. It usually had it's points tilted to the right though.
The Nazi's though decided to use it as one of the many ancient symbol's though. When they applyed it to their flags they tilted the points to the left, creating the god awful relationship between a symbol of good will and luck and the evil crimes and horrible mentality of the Nazi's.
Quite sad really.
It's good that their meeting, the world can now benefit from seeing the evil congrigate in one place. Law's banning the denile are rediculous and merely stiffen and support the denile. They should be allowed to voice whatever opinion they have, reason will always disprove them. Debate will also help to clear up any false idea's people have about the holocaust. The world can only benefit from debate about history. The truth is hidden when it's forced on people.
Oh well, they got free food and housing from Mr. Ahmadinejad I guess so all of those poor, misunderstood individuals probably went there because of that and because they finally found some friends to share their hatred with.
Here we do not even disallow denying the holocaust, we have also banned all Nazi symbology except for historical texts I think. And in that case I don't think it's a particularly bad idea, because we still have Neonazis, despite all the good arguments against it.
Papewaio
12-13-2006, 04:15
Only a minor note combining holocaust and Indonesia that made quite fitting to your point.
Our social studies teacher was on vacation in Indonesia and there he encountered hotel Swastika, with the symbol very publically viewed.
Was your teacher in Bali?
In Buddhist dominated societies the symbol which looks like the Nazi Swastika is in fact the Buddhist Swastika.
The Buddhist Swastika being the older version of the symbol of the two and very common on Buddhist temples, hotels and very often Buddhist Vegetarian Eateries.
Also when looking at a menu in a restaurant that caters for all the vegetarian meals will have a Swastika like symbol marked beside them. These can be seen throughout regions which have a large Buddhist population and even in some places within the rest of Indonesia which has various portions of faiths... although Jakarta is dominated by people of Muslim upbringing (of which some are now secular... but still have a cultural muslim heritage).
Even knowing this and being married to someone of Buddhist heritage and having traveled through Indonesia I was mentally freaked when I arrived in Taiwan. Having jet lag and half asleep seeing temples and restaurants marked with the Swastika was a bit of a shock.
Isn't the whole point of having such a convention (especially one without holocaust survivors present) to create a seemingly civilized pretext to further the view:
"Since the so-called holocaust either never existed or was exaggerated, then one of the reasons for the creation of Israel is removed or reduced." ?
Then, 15-20 years from now, when Iran introduces a UN resolution to abolish the state of Israel due to illegitimate founding, it won't be immediately laughed at/ignored?
Plant a seed. Then take 'the long view'. Strategy.
(Utter ballox, o'course, but hardly a new plan).
A UN resolution?(I actually laughed out loud) Haa Haa Haa Haa.
Do you think nuclear armed Israel would simply obey the resolution?
KukriKhan
12-13-2006, 05:50
A UN resolution?(I actually laughed out loud) Haa Haa Haa Haa.
Do you think nuclear armed Israel would simply obey the resolution?
Exactly. 20 years from now, after the last Holocaust survivor (first-hand testifier) has been buried, and all that exists of it are memorials and histories (second- and third-hand testimonies) - fewer delegates will laugh out loud; many convinced of a Zionist hoax because of conventions like these. Some others with 'substantial' doubts about report accuracy; and yet others crying for open minds to all views.
And in 2026, nuclear-armed Israel may be daunted by nuclear-armed Iran, Syria, Jordan, Palestine & Egypt; nuclearized by the failure of the west to prevent it.
Plant a seed. Bury it. Water it. Wait. It will grow, eventually.
Here's a choice quote from Mahmoud's closing remarks:
"Just as the Soviet Union was wiped out and today does not exist, so will the Zionist regime soon be wiped out,"
Strike For The South
12-13-2006, 07:36
Meh let em organize and belive it wont change a danged thing. As soon as we stop caring we dont realize they are there anymore.
English assassin
12-13-2006, 10:57
Iranians are defiantly neither Anglo-Saxon or Protestant
They are aryan though. Not that I would expect the KKK to know that.
Annoyingly, I can't find a link to a story in the Guardian that told me that a Arab Israeli speaker at the conference had his pass revoked when it was realised that his speech was going to confirm that yes, in fact the holocaust did happen. Which rather puts the free speech argument into perspective, nit that it wasn't in perspective already.
Nice to be back guys. Man, the food in HMP is terrible. Oh, and BKS, the hair? Is it too late to vote for a "Sid Vicious"? You know it makes sense.
Sounds like a great party. Ah well let them, it is kinda rediculous that denying the holocaust is a crime in some european countries. It does kinda make us look like fools that such a conference would not be possible in the 'free world' where we like freedom of speech so much.
@EA, he was refused because of his visum, Iran doesn't recognise the state of Israel.
That is what they said at least.
The criminalization of denial of the genocide of the jews during WWII has nothing to do with freedom of speech.
Nazism was not born from nothing in the late 1920’s and the holocaust was possible only because anti-semitism was widely shared into European population.
This does not mean that Europeans were pogromers, but the idea that jews had something specific that made them different, not integrated into European populations, allowed the relative passivity into which the massive deportation took place.
In the decade that followed the war, the shoah became an absolute argument to prevent anti-semitism as people promoting this form of racism were assimilated to genociders.
To be able to grow once again, antisemits need to destroy this argument to be able to remove the image of children killers that is tied to their activities.
As the denial of the holocaust is absolutely pointless and inept it is punished by the law as a promotion of racism, which is right.
Nothing to do with freedom of speech, everything with anti-semitism.
The criminalization of denial of the genocide of the jews during WWII has nothing to do with freedom of speech.
Freedom of speech means that the government can't prosecute you for your believes, now they can and thus we don't have it. There are also jewish revisionists by the way, David Cole for example, what about him?
doc_bean
12-13-2006, 11:37
One of the problems of 'freedom' is that you can't attack someone attacking 'freedom' without attacking (their) 'freedom' as well.
It's a difficult issue what you should and what you shouldn't allow in a 'free' society. I'm not for the ban on holocaust denial, but then I also don't see any reason to deny it. I'm pretty neutral on the subject, though i fear the slippery slope...
Encouraging that there is a significant group within Iran protesting, or trying to protest, about this. The president was heckled throughout a speech at Tehran University last week.
though i fear the slippery slope...
That slippery slope goes the other direction, it's also forbidden to question the authenticity of the Anne Frank diary for example, which I find pretty rediculous.
doc_bean
12-13-2006, 12:25
That slippery slope goes the other direction, it's also forbidden to question the authenticity of the Anne Frank diary for example, which I find pretty rediculous.
I was actually talking about that slope.
That slippery slope goes the other direction, it's also forbidden to question the authenticity of the Anne Frank diary for example, which I find pretty rediculous.
My girl friend, her mate and I were in Amstersdam and we couldn't find the Anne Frank house.
I told her not to feel bad as it took the Nazis 3 years to find it.
Apparently this was in poor taste ?
I'll get my coat.
My girl friend, her mate and I were in Amstersdam and we couldn't find the Anne Frank house.
I told her not to feel bad as it took the Nazis 3 years to find it.
You could have asked a local, worked for the nazi's ~;)
I didnt mind, I wanted to get stoned :beam:
That's the scary part, so did they
The Nazis or the locals ?
Despite sensationalist tabloid reports of drug crazed maniacs I dont see the Wehrmacht being the efficient fighting machine it was after bogarting the Dutch stash :2thumbsup:
scotchedpommes
12-13-2006, 14:07
Annoyingly, I can't find a link to a story in the Guardian that told me that a Arab Israeli speaker at the conference had his pass revoked when it was realised that his speech was going to confirm that yes, in fact the holocaust did happen. Which rather puts the free speech argument into perspective, nit that it wasn't in perspective already.
Read a mention in the Jerusalem Post, but it's up on Wikipedia here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Conference_to_Review_the_Global_Vision_of_the_Holocaust#Attendees).
The lawyer, Khaled Kasab Mahameed, was to say,
The Holocaust did happen and that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's position of Holocaust denial is wrong. 'Everything that happened must be internalized and the facts must not be denied . . . It is the obligation of all Arabs and all Muslims to understand the significance of the Holocaust. If their goal is to understand their adversary, they must understand the Holocaust.' ... According to Mahameed, ... 'The naqba [disaster] the Palestinians experienced in 1948 is small compared to the Holocaust, but the political implications of the Holocaust have made its terrors a burden on the Palestinian people alone'.
Despite sensationalist tabloid reports of drug crazed maniacs I dont see the Wehrmacht being the efficient fighting machine it was after bogarting the Dutch stash :2thumbsup:
The germans didn't really think it over, once they learned about our tax rates they fled away as far as they could get, and sadly didn't got past Russia.
Poor guys, such cool uniforms and still pwned.
The Nazis or the locals ?
Despite sensationalist tabloid reports of drug crazed maniacs I dont see the Wehrmacht being the efficient fighting machine it was after bogarting the Dutch stash :2thumbsup:
Clearly that's why we annexed Afghanistan.
Airdrops on the Iranian army will consist of opium. And notes telling them of who controls the supply.
yesdachi
12-13-2006, 15:27
I am having a difficult time understanding how the Holocaust can be denied. I understand why some may want to deny it but I don’t understand how it can be denied without ignoring an overwhelming amount of information.
Ahmadinejad (or Ajay among friends) is regularly updating his blog while at the conference. Evidently, they’re out of dip and David Duke is drunk and abusive.
I am having a difficult time understanding how the Holocaust can be denied. I understand why some may want to deny it but I don’t understand how it can be denied without ignoring an overwhelming amount of information.
Not that overwhelming really, if someone can answer some of the questions asked in this 1 hour documentory then please do because I kinda need them.
http://reportersnotebook.com/video/david_cole/david_cole_high_resolution.wmv
Hosakawa Tito
12-13-2006, 17:34
Isn't the whole point of having such a convention (especially one without holocaust survivors present) to create a seemingly civilized pretext to further the view:
"Since the so-called holocaust either never existed or was exaggerated, then one of the reasons for the creation of Israel is removed or reduced." ?
Then, 15-20 years from now, when Iran introduces a UN resolution to abolish the state of Israel due to illegitimate founding, it won't be immediately laughed at/ignored?
Plant a seed. Then take 'the long view'. Strategy.
(Utter ballox, o'course, but hardly a new plan).
Kinda sounds like the book,"1984", doesn't it? A little rewrite in the history department and ...all gone. Ahmad is just preaching to the choir and won't be making many converts to this story.
Next up on the convention schedule, "The Myth of the Iraq War" by G.W.B.
Hey, two can play this game.
Kralizec
12-13-2006, 17:54
Not that overwhelming really, if someone can answer some of the questions asked in this 1 hour documentory then please do because I kinda need them.
http://reportersnotebook.com/video/david_cole/david_cole_high_resolution.wmv
Haven't got the time to watch that right now (and probably can't be bothered anyway), but it's fairly obvious that 60 years afterwards most of the evidence is from written records and such. However believing that the Holocaust was simply a huge conspiracy set up by the Allies (wich is the only real conclusion if you think that it didn't happen) is ridiculous. People who believe in the so-called Holocaust-hoax are amazingly selective in what bits of written history they want to believe. They're often the same people that believe that the ancient Egyptians where white, that the Carthaginians were Indo-European, that the Romans had a doctrine of racial superiority et cetera. They accuse the mainstream of simply believing what they're told, while the same thing is true for them as well- and they've picked the wrong kind of "historians".
Ser Clegane
12-13-2006, 17:55
Welcome back, Hosa :jumping:
Know that's a Christmas surprise ~:)
Well I am not going to allow myselve to be be forced into a position on all this, but it does make for a few valid questions, such as why there was never found any trace of gas in the socalled deathcamps. That is strange, and so is a whole lot more. Honestly, maybe Iran has something here. Mentioned the Anne Frank diary earlier, whose authenticity cannot be questioned, that is weird since some parts are written with a ballpoint, which wasn't commercially introduced untill 1950. I don't know, would prefer a world where somthing like this isn't possible. But I kinda doubt some aspects now as well after reading some of their arguments. I'd say watch the video.
Kralizec
12-13-2006, 18:21
Well I am not going to allow myselve to be be forced into a position on all this, but it does make for a few valid questions, such as why there was never found any trace of gas in the socalled deathcamps. That is strange, and so is a whole lot more. Honestly, maybe Iran has something here. Mentioned the Anne Frank diary earlier, whose authenticity cannot be questioned, that is weird since some parts are written with a ballpoint, which wasn't commercially introduced untill 1950. I don't know, would prefer a world where somthing like this isn't possible. But I kinda doubt some aspects now as well after reading some of their arguments. I'd say watch the video.
If the premise is correct -Anne Franks diary was written partially with a type of pen that didn't exist at the time- then the conclusion -the diary is fake- is also correct.
Has it occurred to you though that whoever said that it was written with a ballpoint might be lying, or simply be off-track? How do you determin that anyway, the composition of the ink (unlikely) or handwriting (unreliable)?
I'm also sceptical about the supposed lack of gass traces, but I can honestly not be bothered to look into either of these. I know what sort of people these arguments generally come from.
I'm also sceptical about the supposed lack of gass traces, but I can honestly not be bothered to look into either of these. I know what sort of people these arguments generally come from.
Very strange people, I was curious about all this and went to a nazi site, you probably know which one, no pleasant company I might add. As it is it is still true, there aren't any gas traces, as was investigated by an canadian chemist that got jailed for his conclusions. Many of the revisionist arguments make too much sense to me, not going to say that they are all nuts.
Well I am not going to allow myselve to be be forced into a position on all this, but it does make for a few valid questions, such as why there was never found any trace of gas in the socalled deathcamps. That is strange, and so is a whole lot more. Honestly, maybe Iran has something here. Mentioned the Anne Frank diary earlier, whose authenticity cannot be questioned, that is weird since some parts are written with a ballpoint, which wasn't commercially introduced untill 1950. I don't know, would prefer a world where somthing like this isn't possible. But I kinda doubt some aspects now as well after reading some of their arguments. I'd say watch the video.
Well one could put forth the argument that all Zyklon-B gas was impounded by the Allies upon discovery. Volatile chemical agents are not the kind of thing one leaves lying around, especially if it has any kind of military application (Albert Speer himself cited Zyklon-B's effectiveness as a weapon, during tests it successfully penetrated all Allied gas mask filters of the day). I also believe Zyklon-B is a non-persistent agent which means if left exposed or stored in an unreliable container will eventually dissipate into the air, leaving virtually no trace. That's just my incredibly amateur opinion on the matter though.
As to Anne Frank's diary well even if it's an hoax I fail to see how its lack of credibility could disprove the existence of the Holocaust. It's not as if the Holocaust was an isolated incident that took place at precise place and time. There are simply too many incidents, eye witness accounts, smoking guns, etc. to be found in Nazi occupied territories to dismiss it altogether. And how does one explain the sudden drop in the Jewish and Gypsy populations during the war?
What about photo and video material showing people who are not much more than bones? Are they volunteering actors who decided to starve in order to make some fake pics and movies?
What about huuuuge lists full of names of killed people? Did the allies write them within a few days after the war?
What about tons of Nazi propaganda saying how bad jews were? Did the allies also make that during the few days after the war? And what about the many german survivors, did they maybe help in making themselves look bad and behave as if all that fake stuff really existed?
Those theories are about as believable as saying the Nazis were an early form of teletubbies, please Fragony, don't disappoint me, it can't be that hard to see the truth.~;)
Tribesman
12-13-2006, 19:54
If the premise is correct -Anne Franks diary was written partially with a type of pen that didn't exist at the time- then the conclusion -the diary is fake- is also correct.
Has it occurred to you though that whoever said that it was written with a ballpoint might be lying, or simply be off-track? How do you determin that anyway, the composition of the ink (unlikely) or handwriting (unreliable)?
No surprise that Frag managed to find the bollox about ballpoints on a nazi site . Its quite common with those sort of sites .
On your next visit there Frag could you ask one of the loonies exactly what the two pieces of loose paper written in ballpoint were ? what part of Anne Franks diary they were ? and why they don't seem to have much in the way of braincells considering they are the master-race ?
. Mentioned the Anne Frank diary earlier, whose authenticity cannot be questioned
It can be questioned , and has been . But of course if you question it in print or broadcast then you can face legal action .
And so far those who claimed it was fake have had their posteriors handed to them on a platter by courts , historians and forensic scientists
lancelot
12-13-2006, 19:56
My girl friend, her mate and I were in Amstersdam and we couldn't find the Anne Frank house.
I told her not to feel bad as it took the Nazis 3 years to find it.
Apparently this was in poor taste ?
Well, I must be of poor taste also, coz that made me laugh... :oops:
Ironside
12-13-2006, 20:03
Well I am not going to allow myselve to be be forced into a position on all this, but it does make for a few valid questions, such as why there was never found any trace of gas in the socalled deathcamps.
Look what I've found while looking around for Zyklon B (didn't know that it was hydrogen cyanide for example).
Our seemingly "brilliant" scientist making those tests (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_A._Leuchter)
Someone can confirm these wiki comments if they want to, don't have time atm.
And Spino, there's a lot of gas-canisters of Zyklon B found in the camps. Not even denied by the deniers (although the claim it to been only used for a desinfectant.
Auschwitch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:GiftgasAuschwitzMuseum.jpg)
Dachau (http://www.ushmm.org/uia-cgi/uia_doc/photos/11544?hr=null)
Majdanek (http://www.ushmm.org/uia-cgi/uia_doc/query/1?uf=uia_fHEEOR)
But read the above link anyway
Kongamato
12-13-2006, 20:09
I thought I'd heard that Otto Frank made some edits to Anne's diary before it was published. Perhaps he used the ballpoint pen.
EDIT: Wikipedia states otherwise, that the ballpoint stuff was found on two pages added to the diary by investigators. The handwriting is also different.
Prince of the Poodles
12-13-2006, 20:15
It can be questioned , and has been . But of course if you question it in print or broadcast then you can face legal action .
Thats completely ridiculous.
It also makes me question the diary more, as now Im wondering why the government of that country would go to such lengths to keep the text from criticism.
Eh, seems healthy to me. If everything about the Holocaust is such a given, then it can't be such a problem to refute the things they will have discussed at this convention.
I suddenly had a mental image that compared this to an anime convention. I wonder if there was SS cosplay.
Red Peasant
12-13-2006, 20:48
Eh, seems healthy to me. If everything about the Holocaust is such a given, then it can't be such a problem to refute the things they will have discussed at this convention.
Thing is, it's not being held for our benefit, but for the Islamic world. Many, maybe the majority, of Muslims will believe whatever this convention decides is the 'truth'. They would rather believe their own people than the Western or Jewish versions. It's only natural, and who can blame them if they see us as the enemy? Of course, there are many intelligent and knowledgeable Muslims who will see through a verdict that purportedly de-bunks the Holocaust, but I think they will be in a minority or their voices drowned in the uproar of anti-Jewish sentiment. They won't care if some Westerners try to refute the findings of 'their' judgement on the Holocaust.
This has got nothing to do with the truth, but Politics and Ideology.
Tribesman
12-13-2006, 21:09
Thats completely ridiculous.
It also makes me question the diary more, as now Im wondering why the government of that country would go to such lengths to keep the text from criticism.
Nope it is not ridiculous at all , it is normal .
If you wanted to publish some rubbish for example saying george Bush is a lying scumbag and he molests chimps . Then you can be taken to court where you will either have to prove that what you have written is true or face the legal consequences .:yes:
But since you seem to think that people being sued for writing bullexcrement is a reason to believe the bullexcrement more it does make me wonder how your mind works ?????????:dizzy2:
Reenk Roink
12-13-2006, 23:06
David Duke? Isn't the KKK a WASP only group? Iranians are defiantly neither Anglo-Saxon or Protestant. Or have the Klukkers gone to "only black and Jew." hating.
This is pure conjecture, but I would guess that the guy has a narrow definition of "Aryan" in mind and therefore must cream his jeans when he hears "Land of the Aryans"... :yes: :2thumbsup: :laugh4:
Prince of the Poodles
12-14-2006, 00:09
Nope it is not ridiculous at all , it is normal .
If you wanted to publish some rubbish for example saying george Bush is a lying scumbag and he molests chimps . Then you can be taken to court where you will either have to prove that what you have written is true or face the legal consequences .
I guess you dont live in the US.
I can go to Borders and find about 30 books filled with lies and distortions about the Bush administration. Google Michael Moore.
In the same store I can find books that suppose all manner of things related to WW2 with little to no backing other than conjecture.
Prince of the Poodles
12-14-2006, 00:13
^Which is why I find it strange that one could be prosecuted for questioning the authenticity of a diary.
Facts should speak for themselves in a historical debate. Government prosecution should never be used to prevent certain opinions. Isnt that oddly nazi-esce?
Tribesman
12-14-2006, 00:16
can go to Borders and find about 30 books filled with lies and distortions about the Bush administration. Google Michael Moore.
Yep and the publisher will have gone to great lengths with its own legal advisors that anything contained in those cannot be fought in a court action.
If they do discover anything that they missed before printing that could lead to a lost law suit then they pulp the whole edition .
edit to add .Which is why I find it strange that one could be prosecuted for questioning the authenticity of a diary.
They are not prosecuted for questioning the authenticity , they are prosecuted for falsely claiming they had proof it was fake .
Can you see the difference ?
This has got nothing to do with the truth, but Politics and Ideology.
Then this is hardly news - Jews hate Arabs and Arabs hate Jews. The record's been looping for a while.
Gregoshi
12-14-2006, 04:38
Ahmadinejad (or Ajay among friends) is regularly updating his blog while at the conference. Evidently, they’re out of dip and David Duke is drunk and abusive.
:laugh4: Thanks Dâriûsh. That was hysterical. :laugh4:
Welcome back Hosa! :2thumbsup:
Papewaio
12-14-2006, 04:53
Well I am not going to allow myselve to be be forced into a position on all this, but it does make for a few valid questions, such as why there was never found any trace of gas in the socalled deathcamps. That is strange, and so is a whole lot more. Honestly, maybe Iran has something here. Mentioned the Anne Frank diary earlier, whose authenticity cannot be questioned, that is weird since some parts are written with a ballpoint, which wasn't commercially introduced untill 1950. I don't know, would prefer a world where somthing like this isn't possible. But I kinda doubt some aspects now as well after reading some of their arguments. I'd say watch the video.
Apart from the additional pages being added after the fact. And that there was fairly explicit pages of Anne longing over a man which her father edited out of the original publication. As for the existence of ball point pens... they were used by the RAF crew during WWII as they were better at high altitude...
As for the gas... even the manufactures of it admitted to suppling it. Also not finding traces of it in the walls of the gas chambers... is that the one where they took samples from the recreated gas chambers because the original ones were demolished?
They're often the same people that believe that the ancient Egyptians where white, that the Carthaginians were Indo-European, that the Romans had a doctrine of racial superiority et cetera.
The carthaginians were pheonician. Thier lineage is closely related to the other syrian peoples, including those of jewish heritage. As for the egyptians, they would not have looked like what people from that area look like now. That was a very turbulent area, that went through many different invasions. Though the fact that they would refer to the nubians as a very dark skinned people does point towards the fact that they were rather light skinned at the time. But still there are some places in egypt that you can find people of a paler skin who have a lineage linked to the gelatian celts. Most of the middle easterners would look nothing like they do now. In Iran alone during the mongol invasions over 90% of the population was destroyed. A very turbulent area and it's more then a stretch to say what anyone of persian and other other middle eastern cultures looked like, let alone skin color.
Honestly, maybe Iran has something here. Mentioned the Anne Frank diary earlier, whose authenticity cannot be questioned, that is weird since some parts are written with a ballpoint, which wasn't commercially introduced untill 1950.
The ballpoint pen was invented in WWII. Used by many pilots becuase other forms of pens wouldnt work at high altitude. Whoever came up with that kind of a theory is attempting more then just presenting interesting facts that contradict history, their trying to rewrite it.
The holocaust happened, millions were senselessly killed by the Nazi's purely in an attempt of genocide. Making a law that bans the denile though is merely adding fuel to a fire. By forcing this history on people with a threat of punishment you simply make the other side more appealing.
“Well I am not going to allow myselve to be forced into a position on all this, but it does make for a few valid questions, such as why there was never found any trace of gas in the so-called death camps.” Zyclon B was very volatile gas, a non-persistent agent, and it was aimed to kill rats. This kind of product you don’t want to stay in your kitchen. They used of CO2 as well, you know, produce by combustion: if they didn’t find some, they have to check their tools and machines. Now, if the deniers can explain the 30 cm of human residues and ashes around all the camps, if they can explain why the Nazis themselves never denied the holocaust, if they can provide the bills and the manufacturers which were paid and involved in the Allies plan of construction, THAT will be a great step forward of their claims. Until this, just take a plane, or walk in Europe. I can give you an address: The Strutoff, Alsace, France. After the visit, you can go top speak to he local French and explain them that their relatives and family members exterminated there are just an allies lie…
Kralizec
12-14-2006, 09:11
The carthaginians were pheonician. Thier lineage is closely related to the other syrian peoples, including those of jewish heritage.
Yes, semetic ~;)
That was the point. These people try to claim those great societies as Aryan, while that contradicts the most basic things we know about them. Just like with the Holocaust they just view things in the manner that suits their doctrine best.
Yes, semetic
Yes "semetic" you could say. Really thats a horrible term though, languages often did varried quite alot between those cultures. The only thing that groups most of them is that they share a genetic ancestry. They really need a better term, one that refers to a language group in which there was actually quite alot of variation is not that great of a term.
There is still something to be said though about the general who has the record for winning the most outnumbered battle being related to the jewish people.
Adrian II
12-14-2006, 10:40
(I've been away for a bit, forgive me if we've moved on from that one.)No, we haven't. And yes, you have. And so have I. Since you are a lawyer I figured you were either pissing away your clients' money in Rio or sweating in one of Her Majesty's Prisons. Since I am a journalist it probably figures that I figured that.
Which is to say you have been sorely missed. Your comments are on the mark as always. British Conservatives acquit themselves very well as long as they keep losing elections.
Very strange people, I was curious about all this and went to a nazi site, you probably know which one, no pleasant company I might add. As it is it is still true, there aren't any gas traces, as was investigated by an canadian chemist that got jailed for his conclusions. Many of the revisionist arguments make too much sense to me, not going to say that they are all nuts.The Canadian is a dentist, I believe. Anyway, I have followed these people for years. They send me their brochures on the assumption that as a journalist I somehow have an illicit interest or facination for these materials since they are anathema in this country. I don't. Their 'findings' and contentions make no sense.
But I can't prove it because then I will be banned from this forum. It is precisely because of such restrictions that the nonsense flourishes and becomes a subterranean cult for people who have an axe to grind with society. All this crap wouldn't hold up for a day in open debate, but we can't have an open debate. It is a real shame.
It is precisely because of such restrictions that the nonsense flourishes and becomes a subterranean cult for people who have an axe to grind with society. All this crap wouldn't hold up for a day in open debate, but we can't have an open debate. It is a real shame.
I wouldn't say that, there are a lot of other urban myths and other kinds of weird "knowledge" around which are not forbidden to talk about.
If people have a fascination for something or want to belive the government is bad for some reason they will always come up with something. Just have a look at the US, they are so free and can debate about anything, and they have more Nazis, KKK, Phelpses and other weird guys than most european countries.:sweatdrop:
Kralizec
12-14-2006, 13:51
Yes "semetic" you could say. Really thats a horrible term though, languages often did varried quite alot between those cultures. The only thing that groups most of them is that they share a genetic ancestry. They really need a better term, one that refers to a language group in which there was actually quite alot of variation is not that great of a term.
There is still something to be said though about the general who has the record for winning the most outnumbered battle being related to the jewish people.
Well if we're to believe everything historians noted about Alexander, he would hold that title and not Hannibal.
The Phoenicians come pretty close to the Greeks as far as their contribution to civilization is concerned. The Greek alphabet was originally just an adaption of the Phoenician writing for example.
I doubt that religious jews would appreciate the relation, though- seeing as how the Carthaginians were Phoenicians, the people wich the Jews called Canaanites.
(btw, the Jews attributed the Canaanites to Ham's lineage and not that of Sem- so "Semetic" is a bit of an ironic term...)
doc_bean
12-14-2006, 13:54
I suddenly had a mental image that compared this to an anime convention. I wonder if there was SS cosplay.
https://img173.imageshack.us/img173/4703/12719024046b9d8888dooo4.jpg
sorry, best I could dig up
Interview with David Duke live from the conference. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2QMQi-m63E) He must have felt right at home.
Well if we're to believe everything historians noted about Alexander, he would hold that title and not Hannibal.
The Phoenicians come pretty close to the Greeks as far as their contribution to civilization is concerned. The Greek alphabet was originally just an adaption of the Phoenician writing for example.
I doubt that religious jews would appreciate the relation, though- seeing as how the Carthaginians were Phoenicians, the people wich the Jews called Canaanites.
(btw, the Jews attributed the Canaanites to Ham's lineage and not that of Sem- so "Semetic" is a bit of an ironic term...)
Alexander very well would hold that title if we believed all the classical historians. But then we would also have to accept that he was a living god. Hannibal's battles were well documented by both sides.
The micenians were related to the pheonicians, so they didn't just donate an alphabet, they gave us the Greeks.
The religious jews wouldnt like alot of things that happened historicly in that area. Especially the sheer amount of religious transfer that went on between jewdaism and zorastrianism. An interesting footnote that came from the cultural transfer was the idea of angels, it had originated with the persian zorastrian culture.
Very strange people, I was curious about all this and went to a nazi site, you probably know which one, no pleasant company I might add. As it is it is still true, there aren't any gas traces, as was investigated by an canadian chemist that got jailed for his conclusions. Many of the revisionist arguments make too much sense to me, not going to say that they are all nuts.
This is precisely my point. Creating law's that jail people for not thinking a correct way backfire. Making laws that ban denying the holocaust will only make the denile that much more believable. A man who's jailed for standing up to the man also will gain support from anti establishment crowed.
Interview with David Duke live from the conference. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2QMQi-m63E) He must have felt right at home.
Did you notice how he defended Ahmadinejad’s (or Ajay among friends) call for the destruction of the United States?
A true patriot.
yesdachi
12-14-2006, 16:44
I find it interesting to have a law for such a thing. For math or maybe even spelling there is a black and white answer for most questions but because history is so subjective and almost fluid with the trend of the day, having a definitive “law” of certain historical events kind of makes sense if only to eliminate any confusion that may be encountered while reading the many “editorial” style (and often questionable) historical recounts of whatever your researching.
I find it interesting to have a law for such a thing. For math or maybe even spelling there is a black and white answer for most questions but because history is so subjective and almost fluid with the trend of the day, having a definitive “law” of certain historical events kind of makes sense if only to eliminate any confusion that may be encountered while reading the many “editorial” style (and often questionable) historical recounts of whatever your researching.
That's precisely why that law exists though. So that in the future it can't be doubted. So that something that bad doesn't happen again (except in Rwanda/Bosnia/Darfur etc).
So that something that bad doesn't happen again (except in Rwanda/Bosnia/Darfur etc).
As a very confusing sign in front of a local synagogue read, "Never again is now." Frightening or appropriate, depending on how you choose to read it.
Did you notice how he defended Ahmadinejad’s (or Ajay among friends) call for the destruction of the United States?
A true patriot.
He's just bitter about not getting elected President. :bounce:
Its amazing the stupidity of the nazi's. Hitler couldve used the trains and material to fuel his war machine, he COULDVE won if he handnt gone a jew-killing rampage.
Its amazing the stupidity of the nazi's. Hitler couldve used the trains and material to fuel his war machine, he COULDVE won if he handnt gone a jew-killing rampage.
If you're going to play "what if," I would think that not invading Russia would be much higher on the list than anything else ...
rory_20_uk
12-15-2006, 08:09
I thought that a lot of the time the Jews were winnowed (using sorter machines provided by IBM amongst others) so that the ones that could work hard were worked to death.
A few trains would not alter things one way or another.
Invading Russia would have been OK with a few caveats: commencing the assault in February / March, concentrating the attack on one objective and possibly having some decent cold weather gear are the first that come to mind.
~:smoking:
If you're going to play "what if," I would think that not invading Russia would be much higher on the list than anything else ...
Funny..... I would have thought not declaring war on the USA would have had a far more profound impact then not killing the jews.
If you're going to play "what if," I would think that not invading Russia would be much higher on the list than anything else ...
Don't forget a proper and sufficient diet. Stalingrad did turn into the largest double blind study on refeeding-syndrome.:dizzy2:
“Making laws that ban denying the holocaust will only make the denile that much more believable.” What is ban is the denial. You can question the figures, the methods etc… What is forbidden is to just say “it never happened”.
And the deniers are not interested in debate. They just reinforce the anti-Semitic feeling.
Some in this site used the word believe (or do not believe) in the Holocaust. We are not on a field of history but ideology. We have more proof of the existence of the death camps and the extermination than the proof of the battle of Azincourt (in French in the text) and Johann of Arc trial.
Watchman
12-15-2006, 13:54
I thought that a lot of the time the Jews were winnowed (using sorter machines provided by IBM amongst others) so that the ones that could work hard were worked to death.You know, Soviet gulags were apparently more effective production-wise than the Nazi "arbeit mach frei" systems. Which is saying something, really. But then the Soviet camps were mainly about forced labour, not killing people through it which ought to make for a fair bit of difference in work morale.
That the Nazis intentionally under-fed their slave labour didn't help any, of course.
A few trains would not alter things one way or another.Given the sheer scale of the "final solution" and the raw numbers of shipments involved, and the fact that this was largely done on the exact same railway system that was used to supply the armies of the Eastern Front, this statement is only true per ce and not in the context of WW2. I've been told the military was quite opposed to the whole extermination camp idea exactly for this reason - they had no difficulty seeing it would tie up enormous amounts of logistical, industrial and transport capacity direly needed for the war effort.
Invading Russia would have been OK with a few caveats: commencing the assault in February / March, concentrating the attack on one objective and possibly having some decent cold weather gear are the first that come to mind.Sensible logistical planning would have been a decent addition. By what I understand of it the German armies basically operated on Thirty Years' War principle when it came to food - namely, they "lived off the land" which was naturally an excellent way to further alienate the populace. Having to appropriate foodstuffs from French farmers and ship them over to the Soviet front was not exactly a terribly workable long-term solution either, since among other things it rather pointlessly pissed off said Frenchmen something fierce.
But then, none of the Axis turned out to be very good at this whole logistics and long-term planning thing. Which put them at something of a serious disadvantage really, as modern industrial wars are to a fairly large degree decided just by those. Something to do with their rather kooky Nietzschean ideologies and (in the cases of Mussolinin and Hitler anyway) amateurish Great Leaders who refused to admit themselves to be in the wrong regardless of evidence, one would imagine.
Kralizec
12-15-2006, 14:19
Armies lived on the land in the Napoleonic wars as well. Like with his expedition to Russia....errr
what point was I goint to make again? ~:confused:
I see little wrong with such a convention, if they wish to deny it let them, I deny that I am warm hearted and generous each and every day at school, yet everyone knows that is halfway to a lie, I say no when they want money (they are at the same school as me they should have at least three coins to rub between their fingers), but it does not change the fact that I have emotions and that I help those who help themselves.
Back to topic, They want to deny the proof that can be shown whenever they wish, it is their option, we have no right to impose our beliefs on them, though we can strongly argue the point.
My memory might be a bit dodgy, but didn't Chaim Weizmann ask for a Jewish State to be created in payment for war services (British bombs sucked and he helped them to become unsucky) and because of the Holocaust, all ways round though all religions may use Jerusalem for prayer, the Jews haven't banned Christiaans and Moslims from their places of worship.
If they are going to use G-d as a justification for war, maybe they should look back at the 6 day war, I doubt that without serious divine intervention Israel would have survived.
All this crap wouldn't hold up for a day in open debate, but we can't have an open debate. It is a real shame.
The ones that want debate probably want it for the wrong reasons, at least that is the impression I got. Whatever the method, a lot of people got murdered. The method doesn't make sense but so does killing a lot of people, I guess it doesn't need to make sense. Not entirely sure if Auswitschz was what we think it was anymore, but it really wouldn't change anything so it's best to just leave it all be.
Tribesman
12-17-2006, 20:38
Not entirely sure if Auswitschz was what we think it was anymore, but it really wouldn't change anything so it's best to just leave it all be.
Well fragony , what do you think "we" think it was ?
Also which camp do you think people think about , there were 3 different ones , the concentration camp , the extermination camp and the labour camp .
Though the first was also used for extermination .
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.