European Hypocrisy? (3495 hits)
Category: NoneRating: 0.74 on 156 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by <> (View user info) at 2006-02-20 18:28:41 EST
At the risk of sounding like a GCSE question, can Europe defend a law that sentences a man to three years in prison for expressing an opinion when we have just finished defiantly trumpeting the virtues of free speech over some arguably equally offensive cartoons?
I'm curious as to what people think about this, and everyone I've just tried to discuss it with has responded with a resounding "Fuck off, I'm in the pub." So, uber, it's over to you. What do you reckon?
If you have no idea what I'm talking about, click this http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4733820.stm
Bastardised version for those with short attention spans: 'historian' and all-around wanker, David Irving, gave a speech in the late 80s in Austria denying the holocaust and the Auschwitz gas chambers. Now he's going to jail for three years for it (although I believe he's mounting an appeal.)
It's illegal in Austria to deny the holocaust. I'm sure we can all work out why, but the question is should it be? How can we protect the world from Nazi influence by using what is arguably a Nazi tactic? What am I missing here?
Chime in.
User Reviews
Submitted by Berty (user info) at 2006-02-24 12:13:09 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Indiana is right, our government would (and did in similar situations) stop short of killing people en masse. Although saying that... how many people did die in tieneman square?
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-02-23 08:38:05 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by shandythedog (user info) at 2006-02-22 21:51:49 (#)
Ranking: 0
precisely thorpe!
i like to think of it this way:
what would the usa government have done if the poor and the blacks etc had risen up and surrounded washington, blockading it, while a bunch of students were inciting them and demanding an end to capitalism. more and more of the dispossesed are poring into washington from all over the country every day. the fucking capital city is blockaded!! the US Army is being denied entry. the protestors refuse to disperse.
(to make this scenario a bit more on a par with the chinky one, you would also have to assume that another major capitalist regime had recently been overthrown and replaced by chaotic communism - say in the UK)
---------------------------
Wouldn't happen, we have welfare and daytime TV. If we were in a communist country they would have to work. Before we would roll tanks over them we would send in tear gas, water hoses and riot police, america has had protestors that would not disperse in the past.
To be honest I didn't know about workers coming in from the countryside. I was under the impression it was difficult to travel inside China, especially in large numbers without the State's permission.
Not trying to be obtuse here, but if the Army was being denied entry, how did they run over people with tanks, or were those the only soilders in the city? Or was that after they had confronted people barricading the city?
I am also curious about your sources, a lot of this happened after China declard Martial law. Were western reportes allowed out, is this from the State?
Submitted by shandythedog (user info) at 2006-02-22 21:51:49 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
precisely thorpe!
i like to think of it this way:
what would the usa government have done if the poor and the blacks etc had risen up and surrounded washington, blockading it, while a bunch of students were inciting them and demanding an end to capitalism. more and more of the dispossesed are poring into washington from all over the country every day. the fucking capital city is blockaded!! the US Army is being denied entry. the protestors refuse to disperse.
(to make this scenario a bit more on a par with the chinky one, you would also have to assume that another major capitalist regime had recently been overthrown and replaced by chaotic communism - say in the UK)
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-22 21:49:59 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
When you cry "fire" and there actually is one, you are not
perverting the truth. . .
Submitted by thorpe (user info) at 2006-02-22 21:42:20 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-02-21 14:07:17 (#)
Ranking: 1
Yeah I'm with Voltaire, or I would be if he'd ever actually said it.
I'm with the other guy...writer dude Falling Tired I think, some weird arse sudanim.
I am aware that I have spelt sudinym badly wrong.
---------------------------------------------
Pseudonym.
Submitted by thorpe (user info) at 2006-02-22 21:41:17 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2006-02-21 14:34:40 (#)
Ranking: 2
It seems to me that it would have been better to completely discredit this assclown instead of giving him a rather public forum to air this crap. I'm not exactly a huge fan of this guy, clearly, but this seems to me like a dangerous slippery slope.
You know you can actually cry fire in a crowded theater if there really is a fire.
--------------------------------
Loki wins the 'best review' award.
Submitted by thorpe (user info) at 2006-02-22 21:39:33 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by shandythedog (user info) at 2006-02-21 18:27:06 (#)
Ranking: 0
the 'tianmen square massacre', which happened quite recently, is relevant here.
ask most normal, educated people what happened and they will tell you that lots of pro-demorcracy students were murdered and crushed by tanks in tianmen square.
we studied this at some length, and the evidence suggests that in reality most of the people killed were workers, not students, and most of them were killed well outside tianmen square at barricades and such, in an attempt to preserve their BLOCKADE OF BEIJING from the army.
there's also a lot of evidence indicating that many of the student leaders took advantage of undergroud railroads to ecape, which were denied to workers. it seems that many ordinary people in china were relieved that the whole thing was put down by the governemnt, as they feared the chaos that could have resulted if a real coup had occured.
it was very interesting to see how the media had absolutely no qualms in presenting the story in distorted ways - respected news magazines for example had PHOTOSHOPPED their front covers to move tanks squashing workers at the blockades on the outskirts of town into the tianmen square setting. and the whole tone of the coverage suggested that it was just some poor harmless students being crushed for no reason by the brutal paranoid regime. from my research, it seemed the regime had every reason to fear an actual coup was on the cards.
as i said, that is quite a recent event.
--------------------------------------------
I did a school project on that in Grade 9 and everybody called me a communist. While it was by no means a proportionate or even a morally defensible reaction to what happened, the government's use of force wasn't by any means entirely unwarranted. The majority of people in the west seem to think the students were just waving placards.
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2006-02-22 18:12:42 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Adereterial (user info) at 2006-02-22 17:41:15 (#)
Ranking: 0
Just another point - his backtracking with 'based on my knowledge at the time' doesn't hold water. This is a man who deliberately removed words, added words and letters (making some words plural) to German sources to make it look like a single order not to fire on a single Jewish transport was actually an order for the whole country - this is a deliberate attempt to falsify the historical record in the hope that people wouldn't check his sources. They did. Yes, some of his argument was based on figures he received from elsewhere but it's also his duty to check them!
===
I didn't know exactly how he'd misrepresented his sources - interesting stuff, thanks.
Submitted by Adereterial (user info) at 2006-02-22 17:41:15 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Just another point - his backtracking with 'based on my knowledge at the time' doesn't hold water. This is a man who deliberately removed words, added words and letters (making some words plural) to German sources to make it look like a single order not to fire on a single Jewish transport was actually an order for the whole country - this is a deliberate attempt to falsify the historical record in the hope that people wouldn't check his sources. They did. Yes, some of his argument was based on figures he received from elsewhere but it's also his duty to check them!
It's supremely stupid - if you make that kind of controversial argument it's going to be picked apart until someone finds a fault - however small.
Submitted by Adereterial (user info) at 2006-02-22 17:33:06 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I have a professional stake in the whole Irving affair - as an Historian his actions are thoroughly reprehensible - you just don't manipulate historical evidence in that way, ever. He's a bad, nay, atrocious historian. This is an argument that's been raging in my department since the news hit yesterday and whilst I can't say I'm in agreement with the law concerned but I do think he's possibly got what he deserved. I really dislike him - I, like most Historians, spend a vast amount of my time not researching but making sure my sources are reliable and properly credited and Irving, and other bastards (Bellesiles), come along and think they can falsify evidence if it doesn't suit their argument. He gives the rest of us a bad name.
For all I care he can rot for everytime I've been told all Historians act like Irving.
Submitted by Smack_Fuck (user info) at 2006-02-21 18:35:59 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
ADam2u is a faggy little whiny joo.
Submitted by shandythedog (user info) at 2006-02-21 18:27:06 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
the 'tianmen square massacre', which happened quite recently, is relevant here.
ask most normal, educated people what happened and they will tell you that lots of pro-demorcracy students were murdered and crushed by tanks in tianmen square.
we studied this at some length, and the evidence suggests that in reality most of the people killed were workers, not students, and most of them were killed well outside tianmen square at barricades and such, in an attempt to preserve their BLOCKADE OF BEIJING from the army.
there's also a lot of evidence indicating that many of the student leaders took advantage of undergroud railroads to ecape, which were denied to workers. it seems that many ordinary people in china were relieved that the whole thing was put down by the governemnt, as they feared the chaos that could have resulted if a real coup had occured.
it was very interesting to see how the media had absolutely no qualms in presenting the story in distorted ways - respected news magazines for example had PHOTOSHOPPED their front covers to move tanks squashing workers at the blockades on the outskirts of town into the tianmen square setting. and the whole tone of the coverage suggested that it was just some poor harmless students being crushed for no reason by the brutal paranoid regime. from my research, it seemed the regime had every reason to fear an actual coup was on the cards.
as i said, that is quite a recent event.
fuck knows what happened 70 years ago with the nazis. i woudln't be suprised if they only murdered particularly nasty jews - raving egomaniacs like razor and co. and who can blame them for that?
Submitted by Adamdidit2u (user info) at 2006-02-21 16:44:30 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
This isn't an issue of free speech, this is an issue of dressing up blatant discrimination in the form of anti-semitism as intelligent debate. The fact that the event at issue is barely more than 2 generations old makes it all the more important
Submitted by G-prime (user info) at 2006-02-21 16:08:41 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Fucking Illinois nazis...
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-02-21 15:33:33 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-02-21 14:28:15 (#)
Ranking: 0
Precisely. We haven't a leg to stand on against Muslim accusations of favoritism unless we take stpes to ensure that ALL religions get equal treatment under the law and freedom of speech is held as the primary ideal of the institution of democracy.
--------------------------------
I think that all religions have equal protection. You are allowed ot make fun of Jewish religion with cartoons, or their religious icons.
It can be a fine line between making fun of Jewish religion and denying the Holocaust, but it is there.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-02-21 14:59:23 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Razor (user info) at 2006-02-21 14:56:02 (#)
Ranking: 2
Holocaust Denial is a problem.
The question you have to address is whether the solution is worse, and in this case I believe it is.
That scumbag, who I would not give a penny to were he homeless on a sub-zero winter night, does not deserve jail time, period.
-------------------
I suppose it's unfortunate that my Christian upbringing would require me to feed and clothe him regardless of what he thought of me.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-02-21 14:57:47 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2006-02-21 14:34:40 (#)
Ranking: 2
You know you can actually cry fire in a crowded theater if there really is a fire.
-------------------
Exactly. That's the problem I have with the reception of a lot of my 'conspiracy theories'.
Kathy: Log on MSN.
Submitted by Razor (user info) at 2006-02-21 14:56:02 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Holocaust Denial is a problem.
The question you have to address is whether the solution is worse, and in this case I believe it is.
That scumbag, who I would not give a penny to were he homeless on a sub-zero winter night, does not deserve jail time, period.
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2006-02-21 14:34:40 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
It seems to me that it would have been better to completely discredit this assclown instead of giving him a rather public forum to air this crap. I'm not exactly a huge fan of this guy, clearly, but this seems to me like a dangerous slippery slope.
You know you can actually cry fire in a crowded theater if there really is a fire.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-02-21 14:28:15 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
"It goes without saying that Irving's harebrained historical theories deserve none of our respect. But perhaps for that very reason, one cannot fail to wonder if, today, there is any point in keeping in force legislation conceived in a very different historical context. Fifty years after the end of Nazism, Holocaust denial - not, of course, incitement to or glorification of genocide - must stop being a crime in Europe. Can it be right that someone should go to prison for saying Auschwitz did not exist, when those who deny the crimes of Stalin or the tortures of the Inquisition go unpunished?
European laws against anti-Semitism have become a nefarious exception which various Islamic intellectuals have recently seized upon as an example of the West's double standards. Far from giving in to demands to establish new restrictions to combat 'Islamophobia', European governments must eliminate this obsolete legislation and reaffirm the West's support for freedom of expression. "
Precisely. We haven't a leg to stand on against Muslim accusations of favoritism unless we take stpes to ensure that ALL religions get equal treatment under the law and freedom of speech is held as the primary ideal of the institution of democracy.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-02-21 14:07:17 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Yeah I'm with Voltaire, or I would be if he'd ever actually said it.
I'm with the other guy...writer dude Falling Tired I think, some weird arse sudanim.
I am aware that I have spelt sudinym badly wrong.
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2006-02-21 13:56:09 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Cross-section of what the european press has to say: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4735496.stm
I'm with El Mundo on this one.
Submitted by BranDo (user info) at 2006-02-21 13:48:26 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
He should have made a joke or cartoon about it to be under the umbrella of freedom of speech and not come up with a plain fascist stance. Servus
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2006-02-21 13:39:37 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Dervel (user info) at 2006-02-21 05:26:04 (#)
Ranking: 0
As for your question, should holocaust denial be illegal? Yes, it should. There is a huge array of personal, documented and material evidence that proves what we already know, the holocaust happened.
===
Exactly! The fact that there IS a huge array of evidence for it is precisely why questioning that evidence should not be illegal - because it just doesn't need to be. If the evidence is strong enough (and it clearly is), open debate is enough to bear those facts out.
By denying people the opportunity to openly discuss this issue, it will fuel the fires of the anti-semitic conspiracy theorists who can now suddenly fly the flag of "IT'S A COVERUP! THEY'RE CENSORING PEOPLE TO PROTECT THEIR LIES!" whereas ridiculing his views on the public stage by actually engaging him in debate would have decimated his credibility forever.
When you support something by force you raise the doubt in people's minds that it is not strong enough to stand on it's own. It's completely counter-productive.
Submitted by Dervel (user info) at 2006-02-21 05:26:04 (#)
Ranking: 0
Holocaust denial is a weak web of lies, which serve no purpose other than character defamation (Anne Frank was a hoax according to deniers) a danger to national security, public order and morality.
===
How is one crackpot making shit up and putting it in a book a danger to morality? If your moral code is so easily swayed by one man in the face of millions with an opposing view then it's not much of a moral code to begin with. Morality should never require ignorance of an opposing viewpoint to function correctly.
Submitted by The_taste_of_Monkeys (user info) at 2006-02-21 11:43:53 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
I think he's more to be pitied than prosecuted. I mean look what he's been saying, that on a few thousand jews died and the rest were given new identities and shipped off.
I just have an image of all these jews walking around like Clark Kent, hiding their secret jewdentity.
Submitted by inion_de_trua (user info) at 2006-02-21 11:43:35 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
i'd go with pity and scorn simply for your spelling.
Submitted by firefly (user info) at 2006-02-21 11:39:15 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by mbstateside (user info) at 2006-02-21 11:26:52 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
It's about time someone told the TRUTH about the Holecaust all those whiney Jews bitching for years about somthing that didn't happen. Just like the blacks over here. I mean comeon we all know there was no slave trade in America all the lovely blacks wanted to come over here and help the white man because they just love picking Cotton. The kind gentle white man offerd to pay them but they wouldn't hear of it. They said all they wanted was to be allowed to live in squaler be treated like shit and have there women raped every now and again. Oepn your eyes to the thruth people.
Now should I be arrested for that or just pity'd and treated with scorn?
Submitted by inion_de_trua (user info) at 2006-02-21 11:13:16 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
it unfortunately should be everyone's right to be stupid.
Submitted by matnotharry (user info) at 2006-02-21 10:57:24 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by digdug (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:04:04 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by matnotharry (user info) at 2006-02-20 18:59:13 (#)
Ranking: 2
Doesn't the very nature of free speech entitle you to say <anything> you want?
If you limit someone, they no longer have free speech (?)
======================================
Go into a theatre and yell "Fire!"
Or walk up to a black person and call them a dirty cotton-picking Nigger.
See how far that argument gets you.
--------------
You missed my point mac, I was attempting to establish what is meant by free speech, ie: it is not free speech when a limit on what is said is established
Submitted by Razor (user info) at 2006-02-21 10:15:50 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
You know, it just shouldn't be illegal for someone to say wrong things... although it would be interesting if all the Jews of Austria filed a class action lawsuit against him for libel.
We should make him come on Oprah and get yelled at for deceiving people.
Submitted by Razor (user info) at 2006-02-21 10:11:11 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I don't care if it's the worst kind of anti-semitism, it simply should not be illegal. Let the people regulate how scumbags like him are viewed, don't prevent it from being discussed.
It's highly embarrassing.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-02-21 09:24:24 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I keep leaving 0's here, and I am interested in this topic.
Just to clarify what I said before. I think throwing this guy in jail is an over reaction.
I don't think any argument against the number of jews killed in WWII is racist, just that every time I have had an argument with someone about it they rely on racist theories.
Submitted by ConorJS (user info) at 2006-02-21 08:24:06 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
http://www.ubersite.com/m/84315
Read it, rate it, laugh at the very mildly NSFW picture
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-02-21 08:23:09 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:26:59 (#)
Ranking: 2
What post-war European govts?
People refuting these estimates are thrown in Austrian jails or labelled "Nazis" and then ignored.
---------------
There were no govts in Europe after WWII??
What about the prewar estimates?
What would they have gained by inflating those numbers when they did give estimates? It makes them look bad to seem like they gave all their jews up to be slaughtered, and there certainly weren't enough influential ones left to somehow inflate the number.
People who refute the number are often labeled Nazi's and called rascist because their theory of how the numbers got inflated is rascist. I have never heard anyone argue people felt bad, or made a mistake, I always hear it is a jew conspiracy. You don't think that smacks of rascism?
You don't think it is rascist and plain stupid to think that the few jews left in Europe after WWII got together and made up a huge lie about how many people were killed? And that they were so conniving and manipulative that all of europe went along with them.
You don't think trying to diminish the number of the people killed in death camps helps the Nazi image?
Submitted by Sphagnum (user info) at 2006-02-21 07:49:58 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Show us your tits
Submitted by hairycoo (user info) at 2006-02-21 07:18:07 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
I dont see why revisionism should be ever illegal. If 10,000 historians all say that the holocaust happened and one twat turns up and says it didn't, then its unlikely that the general concensus will change. The dudes job is to be a historian so if he's proven to be wrong then that makes him a bad historian, which there doesn't need to be a law against as the system works pretty well on its own to fuck up someones life if they are shit.
The fact that a law exists against forming an such an opinion makes me all the more suspicious and that maybe there is something to hide.
Submitted by Nellypaal (user info) at 2006-02-21 06:29:56 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Coyote: 'Professors who can't think should lose their jobs, not their freedom.'
I think this is just about right. He should be made a pariah for being an idiot but three years in jail is harsh.
Dervel: 'Irving broke the law. The Danish cartoonists did not.'
That all depends on which law you're talking about. Irving broke Austrian law; not European, not international. The Danish cartoonists broke Islamic law and if they were tried under that would no doubt be dead by now.
The important thing is to respect and adhere to the laws of the country you're in. Irving knew Holocaust denial was illegal in Austria but made the comments IN Austria. That's plain dumb.
Likewise, you'd have to be an idiot to illustrate Mohammed as a jobbing artist in an Islamic country.
You should, however, be free to parody religious figures / denounce the Holocaust in any moderate country.
To call this a 'European' hypocrisy is a narrow-minded view of what goes on across the Atlantic.
Submitted by Dervel (user info) at 2006-02-21 05:58:20 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Berty (user info) at 2006-02-21 05:41:39 (#)
Ranking: 0
I suppose it is a little bizarre that you can say that Jews should be exterminated but you're not allowed to say that they weren't exterminated.
---
I know. It should be in Ripleys believe it or not.
Throw away thought, you can't accept that the cartoons of Mohamed as character defamation without accepting Mohamed and Islamic teachings. Which, lets face it, isn't going to happen in a Christian country.
The cartoons have caused offense, public disorder and have effected national security all over the world, but they were intended as satire.
Now I may not be a big city lawyer, but I think at best they demonstrate poor judgement.
Submitted by Berty (user info) at 2006-02-21 05:41:39 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Freedom of speech doesn't allow you to say what ever you like.
International laws prevent you from saying anything that can be construed as character defamation or a danger to national security, public order and morality.
That being said, you can say pretty much what you like if you make it a parody.
---------------------
As you've managed to illustrate here, the 'defamation of charachter' bit is so mind meltingly vauge as to be almost unenforcable. Indeed, the only reason they were able to nail this bloke is because the laws on holocaust denial are very solid and very heavy.
I don't know if those substantial laws need to be changed but it's worth remembering that they are the exception, and really a very specific exception at that, to the rule. I suppose it is a little bizarre that you can say that Jews should be exterminated but you're not allowed to say that they weren't exterminated.
Submitted by redskieslookfake (user info) at 2006-02-21 05:31:42 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Dervel (user info) at 2006-02-21 05:26:04 (#)
Ranking: 0
Holocaust denial is a form of anti-Semitism.
Drawing the prophet Mohammed is a form of anti-Islamises.
That is where the similarity ends.
Freedom of speech doesn't allow you to say what ever you like.
International laws prevent you from saying anything that can be construed as character defamation or a danger to national security, public order and morality.
That being said, you can say pretty much what you like if you make it a parody.
Irving broke the law. The Danish cartoonists did not.
Is the law hypocritical? I would say, yes, it is,
As for your question, should holocaust denial be illegal? Yes, it should. There is a huge array of personal, documented and material evidence that proves what we already know, the holocaust happened.
Holocaust denial is a weak web of lies, which serve no purpose other than character defamation (Anne Frank was a hoax according to deniers) a danger to national security, public order and morality.
"How can we protect the world from Nazi influence by using what is arguably a Nazi tactic? What am I missing here?"
Blunt answer? The point.
Suppressing racial and religious intolerance wasn't a Nazi tactic.
Denying the holocaust isn't about Nazi influence, it's about the actions of Nazis 60 years ago. Most importantly, its about remembering and never letting it happen again.
That said, what does Rwanda and the Balkans suggest?
Should Irving have got three years? I don't know, but he certainly shouldn't have got nothing.
---
Exactly.
Submitted by Dervel (user info) at 2006-02-21 05:26:04 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Holocaust denial is a form of anti-Semitism.
Drawing the prophet Mohammed is a form of anti-Islamises.
That is where the similarity ends.
Freedom of speech doesn't allow you to say what ever you like.
International laws prevent you from saying anything that can be construed as character defamation or a danger to national security, public order and morality.
That being said, you can say pretty much what you like if you make it a parody.
Irving broke the law. The Danish cartoonists did not.
Is the law hypocritical? I would say, yes, it is,
As for your question, should holocaust denial be illegal? Yes, it should. There is a huge array of personal, documented and material evidence that proves what we already know, the holocaust happened.
Holocaust denial is a weak web of lies, which serve no purpose other than character defamation (Anne Frank was a hoax according to deniers) a danger to national security, public order and morality.
"How can we protect the world from Nazi influence by using what is arguably a Nazi tactic? What am I missing here?"
Blunt answer? The point.
Suppressing racial and religious intolerance wasn't a Nazi tactic.
Denying the holocaust isn't about Nazi influence, it's about the actions of Nazis 60 years ago. Most importantly, its about remembering and never letting it happen again.
That said, what does Rwanda and the Balkans suggest?
Should Irving have got three years? I don't know, but he certainly shouldn't have got nothing.
Submitted by Berty (user info) at 2006-02-21 04:59:36 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Three years does seem harsh. Particularly as anti-semnatism is coming back into fashion again.
Submitted by zoobie2000 (user info) at 2006-02-21 04:19:17 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I HATE GERMANS !!! THEY SHOULD ALL BE SHOT AFTER BEING RAPED BY DONKEYS AND DROWNING IN THEIR OWN PISS !!!
Submitted by rad1101 (user info) at 2006-02-21 04:08:00 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
just goes to show you those middle european countries are still run by nazis.
Submitted by redskieslookfake (user info) at 2006-02-21 04:07:01 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Well, one is an attempt to cover up one of the greatest tragedies in Mankind's history, the shameful systematic genocide of millions of people. The repetition of a lie can give it credence. Witness the ramblings of the BNP apologists pointing to the 'respected historian.'
Muslims commit their share of crimes too.
That twat is rambling about covering up a crime, whereas the Muslims insist that mocking their prophet is a crime.
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2006-02-21 03:52:09 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
From the Beeb:
"...Vienna's Der Standard says one should retain laws that make it a crime to deny the Holocaust, regardless of arguments about freedom of speech.
People like David Irving "know very well, or can find out, that these inconceivable crimes happened and how they happened", it says. Their aim is to "deny them, trivialize them and make them politically acceptable"...."
Just like a Danish journalist can find out that drawing mohammed with a bomb on his head is going to be seen as extremely offensive. I'd like to see them argue that those cartoons weren't meant to 'trivialize' or make anti-muslim sentiment 'politically acceptable'
How dare we turn round to the muslim world and say "hey, fuck you - *we* have free speech over in the enlightened west." We can't claim the higher moral ground and then get all pissy just because the issue we're now dealing with is on our doorstep.
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2006-02-21 03:19:56 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by JSultan (user info) at 2006-02-21 00:58:31 (#)
Ranking: 0
Its sad that after skimming all the reviews, it turned out to just discuss the numbers of the holocaust, not the issue of how everyone is upset at the muslims for getting upset when everyone else does the same thing.
===
Well, I think the general consensus was that this and the cartoons aren't comparable. I'm not sure I agree with that.
Submitted by rad1101 (user info) at 2006-02-21 01:31:02 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
one litre of petrol and twenty minutes.
Submitted by JSultan (user info) at 2006-02-21 00:58:31 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Its sad that after skimming all the reviews, it turned out to just discuss the numbers of the holocaust, not the issue of how everyone is upset at the muslims for getting upset when everyone else does the same thing.
Submitted by Axolotl (user info) at 2006-02-20 23:23:47 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
No comment
Submitted by joedaddy (user info) at 2006-02-20 23:17:18 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
was his attorney a joo?
Submitted by jgreening (user info) at 2006-02-20 22:32:59 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Didn't read it, but I must say...
HEAT
ROCKET
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 22:10:12 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Fine! Heat!! G'nite for sure !!
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 22:07:35 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Filthy A, where you is?? What? It's 2 or 3 AM over there?
NO FUCKIN' EXCUSE!!......
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 22:04:24 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by ConorJS (user info) at 2006-02-20 21:59:59 (#)
Ranking: 2
(Draws in breath loudly) Did I just get rating 100 on a most heatede post? I better have, or someone's gonna pay...
________________________________________________________________
Bub, I don't think ya got 100 on anything in the world. Sorry.....
What I gots ta pay???
Submitted by ConorJS (user info) at 2006-02-20 21:59:59 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
(Draws in breath loudly) Did I just get rating 100 on a most heatede post? I better have, or someone's gonna pay...
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 21:47:25 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
"Along with muggers, fuckers, and thieves."
Not the real words, but that's what it sounded like way back then. . .
Submitted by ConorJS (user info) at 2006-02-20 21:47:00 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
http://www.ubersite.com/m/84315
Rate this! I don't care if you -2 it, ATLEAST LOOK AT THE PICTURE!!! (very VERY mildly NSFW)
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 21:44:18 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
<cue Olivia Newton John singing>
"I'm a fuckin' idiot, idiot...."
Heh!!
Submitted by ConorJS (user info) at 2006-02-20 21:44:03 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
"I love that dirty water (watAH, here)..."
And I can spell dumbass. I just felt like being a re-re.
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 21:41:14 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
"Oh, oh, Boston, your're my home." (like to take time with my baby, to walk around).
Standells, circa 1965. . . . .
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 21:38:28 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Oooopsss! The names sounded British. That's what ya get from a dumbass from Colorado.
Notice I CAN SPELL DUMBASS? :)))
Submitted by ConorJS (user info) at 2006-02-20 21:31:47 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 21:28:31 (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by ConorJS (user info) at 2006-02-20 21:15:51 (#)
Ranking: 0
To whoever the hell asked if I ever lived in DC, Philadelphia, New Orleans or other great chocolate cities of our time, I say no.
I recently moved out of Dorchester, and before that, Roxbury. Roxbury: 80+% black. Dorchester: around 60% black.
Suck it.
______________________________________________________
No, chump, suck this!! You have to deal with British black folk. American
black people have a bigger grudge to bear, and they will whup your butt. . . .
====================
No offense meant by this, but you're an idiot. Dorchester and Roxbury are in/around BOSTON. I grew up in CHARLESTOWN, ALSO NEAR BOSTON. And I fought black kids growing up all the time. I won if I had more friends around me, they won if they had more friends at hand.
Ya dumass
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 21:28:31 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by ConorJS (user info) at 2006-02-20 21:15:51 (#)
Ranking: 0
To whoever the hell asked if I ever lived in DC, Philadelphia, New Orleans or other great chocolate cities of our time, I say no.
I recently moved out of Dorchester, and before that, Roxbury. Roxbury: 80+% black. Dorchester: around 60% black.
Suck it.
______________________________________________________
No, chump, suck this!! You have to deal with British black folk. American
black people have a bigger grudge to bear, and they will whup your butt. . . .
Submitted by Stabkill (user info) at 2006-02-20 21:18:48 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Lack of knowledge about Europe where merely sporting a swastika is a serious crime in more countries than not. Don't you forget when France freaked out over Ebay nazi stuff?
Submitted by ConorJS (user info) at 2006-02-20 21:15:51 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
To whoever the hell asked if I ever lived in DC, Philadelphia, New Orleans or other great chocolate cities of our time, I say no.
I recently moved out of Dorchester, and before that, Roxbury. Roxbury: 80+% black. Dorchester: around 60% black.
Suck it.
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 21:08:47 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
So. I go tske a shit, come back before logging out, and what do I find?
Caul and Williamson apologizing to each other?
"Man, I didn't mean what I said."
"Oh baby, I didn't either.
>Kiss kiss kiss>
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
FUCK BoTH OF YOU :-D
I be gwine to bed, fer shure. IMO KEEL YOU. YA BE GWINE BE
BUBBAED :)
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:57:27 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:47:30 (#)
Ranking: 2
Caul once said that I looked albino... I joked it was my superior German blood. From that point onwards we sometimes made a racial quip or two about eachother all in jest. If he says he was offended, I call bullshit.
---
I know but I'm trying to discredit you. That's what I do best! :-D
Submitted by Dolson (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:50:12 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Dude, I'm not saying that disputing the numbers of the holocaust is racist, I'm saying that it's moronic.
And I'd say the same thing if you denied that a lot of Native Americans were killed by whitey.
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:47:30 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:36:23 (#)
Ranking: 2
Williamson, perhaps you meant well, but I checked. You typed NO INTERNET SMILEY FACES.
If you meant to be sarcastic or were trying to joke, I apologize. . .
=-=--=-==-=-=--==-
I actually thought he was referring to another time (Can't find link...).
At any rate, I certainly don't think the French are any genetically inferior... only the Canadians.
;) <------- Smiley!!!
Caul once said that I looked albino... I joked it was my superior German blood. From that point onwards we sometimes made a racial quip or two about eachother all in jest. If he says he was offended, I call bullshit.
Besides, this whole arguement is the reason why this whole thing is so bullshit; namely: Arguing against quantative (not qualitive) war-facts is somehow racist. If I said that "not many Indians were killed by Americans", it would be considered stupid, but not racist. Why can't the same thing be said about the holocaust without being seen as a Nazi sympathiser?
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:46:16 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Well, Freighbors and Nends, I gots ta go beddy=bye. I must be up at
aboot 4 AM, and I be hittin' da sauce. Someone else has to generate
da heat. 'Nite. . .
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:36:23 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Williamson, perhaps you meant well, but I checked. You typed NO INTERNET SMILEY FACES.
If you meant to be sarcastic or were trying to joke, I apologize. . .
Submitted by Dolson (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:30:11 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Yes, and what we're telling you is that the number is pretty damn well proven.
That's why I insist that you're full of shit.
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:26:59 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:08:45 (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:05:22 (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:58:56 (#)
Ranking: 2
Propagandists do pull numbers out of their arse... and they know how to forge documents.
------------------------------------
And all the govts of Europe got together to forge pre-war documents and make up estimates of jewish populations before and after the war?
And they did this so effectively there are no reliable accounts that refute these estimates?
_________________________________________________________________________
Williamson, can you say PWNED? I knew ya could. . . .
-=--==--==-=-=-=--==--==--==-
What post-war European govts?
People refuting these estimates are thrown in Austrian jails or labelled "Nazis" and then ignored.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:07:38 (#)
Ranking: 0
Again, I don't think williamson understands the importance Holocaust. It's not about the number.
I wonder if the little SS wannabe would have the balls to tell me in my face that I'm a lower race like he once did.
-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
If it's not about the number than good. The number is the only thing I'm arguing.
2nd: Don't twist my words. I said that in jest and you fucking know it LaFlamme. A bit of a joke, a bit of a tease. Do internet smileys mean NOTHING to the French?
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:26:58 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by ThatOneGirl (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:18:29 (#)
Ranking: 0
Don't generalize to all of Europe. Look at the list of countries with laws against Holocaust denial. .. It's a relatively short list.
______________________________________________________________
That One Girl: Two years on Uber, over 1700 reviews, and yet to post. Huh??
Caul, the minorities you mentioned, when amassed together, make up
a large part of the population of ANY country. . .
Submitted by fried-green-potatoes (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:26:50 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Seems a law that potentially turns a fringe public figure into a martyr could be classified as dangerous and prone to effects that are at odds with its intent.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:19:44 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:12:09 (#)
Ranking: 2
Caul, post the link where he called you some kinda sub-human.
I might wanna agree :)
==
I don't recall. I know he was harassing me about a genetic disease with a higher incidence on smaller populations (jews, french-canadians, cajuns, irish) and tried to make a point that we are lower races.
Obviously our nazi friend confuses statistics with genetics.
Submitted by ThatOneGirl (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:18:29 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Don't generalize to all of Europe. Look at the list of countries with laws against Holocaust denial. .. It's a relatively short list.
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:12:09 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Caul and Williamson duke it out, film at 11.
Caul, post the link where he called you some kinda sub-human.
I might wanna agree :)
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:08:45 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:05:22 (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:58:56 (#)
Ranking: 2
Propagandists do pull numbers out of their arse... and they know how to forge documents.
------------------------------------
And all the govts of Europe got together to forge pre-war documents and make up estimates of jewish populations before and after the war?
And they did this so effectively there are no reliable accounts that refute these estimates?
_________________________________________________________________________
Williamson, can you say PWNED? I knew ya could. . . .
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:07:38 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Again, I don't think williamson understands the importance Holocaust. It's not about the number.
I wonder if the little SS wannabe would have the balls to tell me in my face that I'm a lower race like he once did.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:05:22 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:58:56 (#)
Ranking: 2
Propagandists do pull numbers out of their arse... and they know how to forge documents.
------------------------------------
And all the govts of Europe got together to forge pre-war documents and make up estimates of jewish populations before and after the war?
And they did this so effectively there are no reliable accounts that refute these estimates?
Submitted by Dolson (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:05:15 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Yeah, because there's a real incentive to propagandize about how many people died in the holocaust.
And when did they decide on the 11 million number? At the propagandist convention?
And they faked a whole war's worth of German documents? When were they doing this? I suppose you think that whole Eichmann thing is just a lie too?
You're still a putz.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:04:19 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:52:50 (#)
Ranking: 2
-=-=-=-==-=-=--==-=
Because Germany was having enough trouble fighting on the fronts, let alone creating an army at home that could discover, find, round up, send to camps and execute such a collossal number of people. To kill this many people would be an amazing feat in itself, yet alone to do so while also trying to singlehandedly defeat the Brits, Russians and Americans in hot war.
Because before nazi documents reached the public they would have been passed through godknows how many Ministries of War. These nations wanted to paint Nazis with a bad brush to boost propaganda.
I believe that Jews, Gyps and Traitors were gassed, shot and god knows what.
I don't believe that it happened to 11,000,000 of them (1/8 of the entire population of Germany... How does one find so many Jews, Commies and Gyps, yet alone methodolically round them up and exterminate them during wartime?).
===
The Holocaust didn't happen overnight. Your logic sucks.
Jews were being targetted even before the war broke out and ghettos started in 1940 during the Phony War. So they all the time to round them up was already pretty much done.
Nazis also had collaborators in all nations. I should know.
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:03:00 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Fer Chrissakes, Billy-San, the Earth is flat, no one landed on the moon,
Christopher Comumbus was a myth, and Filthy Assistant is a man.
Anything else you want to deny?
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-02-20 20:02:17 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:52:50 (#)
Ranking: 2
Because Germany was having enough trouble fighting on the fronts, let alone creating an army at home that could discover, find, round up, send to camps and execute such a collossal number of people. To kill this many people would be an amazing feat in itself, yet alone to do so while also trying to singlehandedly defeat the Brits, Russians and Americans in hot war.
Because before nazi documents reached the public they would have been passed through godknows how many Ministries of War. These nations wanted to paint Nazis with a bad brush to boost propaganda.
I believe that Jews, Gyps and Traitors were gassed, shot and god knows what.
I don't believe that it happened to 11,000,000 of them (1/8 of the entire population of Germany... How does one find so many Jews, Commies and Gyps, yet alone methodolically round them up and exterminate them during wartime?).
-------------------------------------
Because people don't want to believe the worst. They didn't think they were going to be round up and killed. Pogroms in Russia and eastern Europe had gone on for years. All over Europe for years there had been waves of anti semitism where jews were expelled or forced to convert, but they hadn't been slaughtered in hundreds of years. That is the scary thing about it how well it was engineered. "Work will set you free" was on the gate of auschwitz. When they went into the "showers" they were told to hang their clothes on numbered hooks so they could remember where their clothes were. The first engineering report I ever read was explaining a proposal to feed exhaust into the back of a truck to kill the people in the back, and it didn't once mention jews.
I don't know 100% if 11 mil is the correct number, but to think it is impossible makes me doubt you really studied this.
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:58:56 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Dolson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:57:15 (#)
Ranking: 0
I believe that Jews, Gyps and Traitors were gassed, shot and god knows what.
I don't believe that it happened to 11,000,000 of them (1/8 of the entire population of Germany... How does one find so many Jews, Commies and Gyps, yet alone methodolically round them up and exterminate them during wartime?).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Easy, you go after Polish Jews, or you have your Hungarian lackeys round their Jews up for you.
People don't just pull numbers out of their ass for stuff like this, especially given the documentation.
Putz.
-==--=-=-==-=-=--=
Propagandists do pull numbers out of their arse... and they know how to forge documents.
Submitted by Dolson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:57:15 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I believe that Jews, Gyps and Traitors were gassed, shot and god knows what.
I don't believe that it happened to 11,000,000 of them (1/8 of the entire population of Germany... How does one find so many Jews, Commies and Gyps, yet alone methodolically round them up and exterminate them during wartime?).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Easy, you go after Polish Jews, or you have your Hungarian lackeys round their Jews up for you.
People don't just pull numbers out of their ass for stuff like this, especially given the documentation.
Putz.
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:56:24 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:52:02 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:38:02 (#)
Ranking: 2
I just don't trust who wrote these "facts". The number 11,000,000 just doesn't add up.
That's all I'm saying on this subject... Just arguing this opinion can make me an international criminal supposedly. Stick that in your freedom pipe and smoke it.
---------------------------------------
Really? I thought this guy was going to jail for saying there were no gas chambers, not arguing numbers.
=--==-=-=-=--==-=-=--==-=-=-
Yeah, he was more extreme than me and I don't agree with him...
Though I still am technically breaking Austrian, German, Czech and Swedish (as far as I know, possibly more than just those countries) law just by writing my reviews on this post.
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:56:00 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
What my uncle told me about Treblinka, was he full of shit? Nope.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:54:03 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:49:47 (#)
Ranking: 0
The fact is, unless you were alive during the holocaust, you will really never know "for sure".
-----------------------
Yep the old guy who I saw spoke in high school did it for shits and giggles. He got a fake tattoo and cried on stage because he thought it was a great way to kill time.
The museum in auschwitz is all faked as well.
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:52:50 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:41:03 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:38:02 (#)
Ranking: 2
That's all I'm saying on this subject... Just arguing this opinion can make me an international criminal supposedly. Stick that in your freedom pipe and smoke it.
===
Bah, don't disappear dude - you seem to be the only person here who is possibly going to go down a different route and I'm genuinely curious. If you think the numbers don't add up, what's your theory on why they may have been falsified?
-=-=-=-==-=-=--==-=
Because Germany was having enough trouble fighting on the fronts, let alone creating an army at home that could discover, find, round up, send to camps and execute such a collossal number of people. To kill this many people would be an amazing feat in itself, yet alone to do so while also trying to singlehandedly defeat the Brits, Russians and Americans in hot war.
Because before nazi documents reached the public they would have been passed through godknows how many Ministries of War. These nations wanted to paint Nazis with a bad brush to boost propaganda.
I believe that Jews, Gyps and Traitors were gassed, shot and god knows what.
I don't believe that it happened to 11,000,000 of them (1/8 of the entire population of Germany... How does one find so many Jews, Commies and Gyps, yet alone methodolically round them up and exterminate them during wartime?).
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:52:07 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:47:04 (#)
Ranking: 0
...I especially think that seeing that he recanted that 3 years is excessive.
===
I'd agree with that but I'm not entirely sure how genuine his about-face was. Apparently he said in the trial "I am not an expert on the holocaust" which is curious considering he spent 13 years writing a book about Hitler.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:52:02 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:38:02 (#)
Ranking: 2
I just don't trust who wrote these "facts". The number 11,000,000 just doesn't add up.
That's all I'm saying on this subject... Just arguing this opinion can make me an international criminal supposedly. Stick that in your freedom pipe and smoke it.
---------------------------------------
Really? I thought this guy was going to jail for saying there were no gas chambers, not arguing numbers.
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:51:58 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
ETS, you can know some things "for sure." Were you around in 1963 when
JFK was shot? I was, but kids today say it didn't happen....
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:49:47 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Seriously though, anyone who thinks there was no holocaust should not even be dignified with a response... Either that or they should be laughed at and thoroughly embarrassed.
The fact is, unless you were alive during the holocaust, you will really never know "for sure".
I'm always skeptical of history, as history is written mostly by the winners. The propaganda machinery of ANY country, particularly the United States, is certainly not above a little inflation of truth here and there - or altogether abandonment of it.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:47:04 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:12:53 (#)
Ranking: 0
If you look around, numerous times you will see williamson "rank" races and take great pride in his german origins (whatever that is). He once not so subtely told me i was part of a lower race. He's pretty much a closeted nazi (which he idolizes).
---------------------------
Isn't he part scottish? According to Nazi's aren't they lower then real Germans?
Anyway the argument at hand.
This is completely different then insulting someone's religion. Political cartoons, while they might be offensive and distasteful to some, are opinion.
He was trying to refute historical fact, he was using his position to spread lies that benefit and support a philosophy that caused arguably one of the most evil events in human history (yes more people were killed in Russia in and after WWII, but never with the thought out mass industrial effiency). Williamson might refute the numbers, but even he would be dumb enough to argue that there were no gas chambers.That being said I think these laws were written in a time when people could have tried to ignore and cover up history, and that they are no longer needed. I especially think that seeing that he recanted that 3 years is excessive.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:45:57 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:43:55 (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:42:06 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Dolson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:31:59 (#)
Ranking: 0
Anyone who wants to dispute the effects of the holocaust is a douchebag, period.
===
Exactly. The number of casualties aren't important in the Holocaust. People who dispute the numbers are only trying to downplay the despicable abuse of power by the nazi.
The Holocaust isn't only about jews. It's also a reflexion on humanity. People who don't get that need to eat my feces.
___________________________________________________________________
After all that McDonalds you ate? Eeewwwwwwwwwwww!!
===
Even more so.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:45:01 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:41:36 (#)
Ranking: 2
Williamson, why not be an international criminal? You are already
an Ubercriminal :)
You don't trust whomever wrote the 'facts'. Fine. That is an opinion, and
why is your opinion any better than anyone else's?
===
Apparently, because he's an australian with German and Scottish origins (euphemism for albino teenager with pimples). At least that's what he keeps puffing his chest with...god knows why.
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:43:55 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:42:06 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Dolson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:31:59 (#)
Ranking: 0
Anyone who wants to dispute the effects of the holocaust is a douchebag, period.
===
Exactly. The number of casualties aren't important in the Holocaust. People who dispute the numbers are only trying to downplay the despicable abuse of power by the nazi.
The Holocaust isn't only about jews. It's also a reflexion on humanity. People who don't get that need to eat my feces.
___________________________________________________________________
After all that McDonalds you ate? Eeewwwwwwwwwwww!!
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:42:06 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Dolson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:31:59 (#)
Ranking: 0
Anyone who wants to dispute the effects of the holocaust is a douchebag, period.
===
Exactly. The number of casualties aren't important in the Holocaust. People who dispute the numbers are only trying to downplay the despicable abuse of power by the nazi.
The Holocaust isn't only about jews. It's also a reflexion on humanity. People who don't get that need to eat my feces.
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:41:36 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Williamson, why not be an international criminal? You are already
an Ubercriminal :)
You don't trust whomever wrote the 'facts'. Fine. That is an opinion, and
why is your opinion any better than anyone else's?
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:41:03 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:38:02 (#)
Ranking: 2
That's all I'm saying on this subject... Just arguing this opinion can make me an international criminal supposedly. Stick that in your freedom pipe and smoke it.
===
Bah, don't disappear dude - you seem to be the only person here who is possibly going to go down a different route and I'm genuinely curious. If you think the numbers don't add up, what's your theory on why they may have been falsified?
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:38:02 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:33:08 (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:27:13 (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by ConorJS (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:16:38 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 18:44:05 (#)
Ranking: 2
I myself could be thrown into many European jails because I also refute the 6 million figure. Not the holocaust entirely, but the numbers surrounding it I believe are fabricated.
======================
Actually it was 11 million counting gypsies, socialists, homosexuals, the handicapped, and other undesirables. And it's pretty easy to validate, too. Them Nayzees were good record keepers. How can you not believe 6 million? The logistics? 20 million Russians died in WWII, and that IS verified.
==-=--=--=-==--=-=-==--==-=
The Germans were running out of men fighting on the fronts, yet supposedly they were only able to kill only twice to thrice as many Russians through carpet bombings, artillery barrages and general acts of war than find people in hiding, put them into ghettos, put them on trains, move them out to camps and slaughter them? Don't you think that the killing of men you are carpet bombing versus men who are hiding and trying to escape should be at a ration a little higher than 3:1?
Add to the fact that our sided needed to paint those dastardly Krauts as evil-doers and the motive to bend the numbers for propoganda is an added factor.
I know the holocaust hapened. I just don't believe it happened to the effect that we are told.
__________________________________________________________________
Huh? You believe a statistic saying how many folks the Germans could kill, simply
because it will justify what you believe, but you won't believe verified numbers?
We won't confuse you with facts, you have made up your mind...
-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
I just don't trust who wrote these "facts". The number 11,000,000 just doesn't add up.
That's all I'm saying on this subject... Just arguing this opinion can make me an international criminal supposedly. Stick that in your freedom pipe and smoke it.
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:35:56 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Dolson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:31:59 (#)
Ranking: 0
Dude...the Nazis kept perfect records of who they killed. Why do you think they tatooed the concentration camp inmates? They used computers to sort everyone out. The numbers are pretty indisputable.
I mean seriously, if they weren't killed, where did they go? Did a few million people just decide to go on holiday?
Anyone who wants to dispute the effects of the holocaust is a douchebag, period.
_________________________________________________________________________
Yeah, and the computers were running XP-Pro... :<)
Submitted by thorpe (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:35:22 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:33:16 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:26:12 (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by ConorJS (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:23:36 (#)
Ranking: 1
And why is everyone so scared of neegras?
Everyone always says, "aw yeah, you go up to a black guy ans say that and he'll kick yer ass."
What makes black people so tough
_______________________________________________________________________
You ever live in DC? Or Philly? Or Detroit? NO? Then go out and try it.
"OOOOOOOOOOOOO, that smell. The smell of heat's around you."
===
Chaps, please. We're talking british historians and austrian jews - there is no possible way to fit a David Chappelle sketch into this.
Also somehow I sense you're now going to prove me wrong.
-----------------
"I'm Six-mil Jews, inaDitch!
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:34:42 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:30:30 (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:26:38 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by thorpe (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:24:18 (#)
Ranking: 1
I have Williamson recorded (blind drunk obviously) as calling the Holocaust a "glorious thing". There's an anti-semitic pro-life monster that's lurking just below the surface, waiting for alcohol.
===
Why am I not suprised?
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==--=-=-=-=-==--==--=--==-
I'm one mushroom cloud laying motherfucker, motherfucker.
Also in my drunken states I have called for the eradication of all Moslems, Aborigines, Jews, Chinese, Maoris, Americans, capitalists, flag-burners and hippies. I'm a politically angry drunk.
====
Maybe you should see a shrink instead of getting drunk.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:34:34 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by matnotharry (user info) at 2006-02-20 18:59:13 (#)
Ranking: 2
Doesn't the very nature of free speech entitle you to say <anything> you want?
If you limit someone, they no longer have free speech (?)
-------------------------
There is always free speech wherever you go, so long as you're bold enough to say it and accept the consequences.
There are no limits. You either bring people with you, or you pit them against you with what you say.
For instance: I could say right now with confidence that I strongly feel that George Bush should have his head blown off and the American people should stage a coup to take back the country from the hands of the evil, neocon fucks who are at the helm...
...but, see, I wouldn't dare do that. Not in a million years would I say something like that.
Not unless I was prepared to die for it.
And I am.
TORCH WASHINGTON!
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:33:16 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:26:12 (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by ConorJS (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:23:36 (#)
Ranking: 1
And why is everyone so scared of neegras?
Everyone always says, "aw yeah, you go up to a black guy ans say that and he'll kick yer ass."
What makes black people so tough
_______________________________________________________________________
You ever live in DC? Or Philly? Or Detroit? NO? Then go out and try it.
"OOOOOOOOOOOOO, that smell. The smell of heat's around you."
===
Chaps, please. We're talking british historians and austrian jews - there is no possible way to fit a David Chappelle sketch into this.
Also somehow I sense you're now going to prove me wrong.
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:33:08 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:27:13 (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by ConorJS (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:16:38 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 18:44:05 (#)
Ranking: 2
I myself could be thrown into many European jails because I also refute the 6 million figure. Not the holocaust entirely, but the numbers surrounding it I believe are fabricated.
======================
Actually it was 11 million counting gypsies, socialists, homosexuals, the handicapped, and other undesirables. And it's pretty easy to validate, too. Them Nayzees were good record keepers. How can you not believe 6 million? The logistics? 20 million Russians died in WWII, and that IS verified.
==-=--=--=-==--=-=-==--==-=
The Germans were running out of men fighting on the fronts, yet supposedly they were only able to kill only twice to thrice as many Russians through carpet bombings, artillery barrages and general acts of war than find people in hiding, put them into ghettos, put them on trains, move them out to camps and slaughter them? Don't you think that the killing of men you are carpet bombing versus men who are hiding and trying to escape should be at a ration a little higher than 3:1?
Add to the fact that our sided needed to paint those dastardly Krauts as evil-doers and the motive to bend the numbers for propoganda is an added factor.
I know the holocaust hapened. I just don't believe it happened to the effect that we are told.
__________________________________________________________________
Huh? You believe a statistic saying how many folks the Germans could kill, simply
because it will justify what you believe, but you won't believe verified numbers?
We won't confuse you with facts, you have made up your mind...
Submitted by Dolson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:31:59 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Dude...the Nazis kept perfect records of who they killed. Why do you think they tatooed the concentration camp inmates? They used computers to sort everyone out. The numbers are pretty indisputable.
I mean seriously, if they weren't killed, where did they go? Did a few million people just decide to go on holiday?
Anyone who wants to dispute the effects of the holocaust is a douchebag, period.
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:31:27 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
This is slowly turning into a "Is Williamson a Nazi" post....
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:30:30 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:26:38 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by thorpe (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:24:18 (#)
Ranking: 1
I have Williamson recorded (blind drunk obviously) as calling the Holocaust a "glorious thing". There's an anti-semitic pro-life monster that's lurking just below the surface, waiting for alcohol.
===
Why am I not suprised?
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==--=-=-=-=-==--==--=--==-
I'm one mushroom cloud laying motherfucker, motherfucker.
Also in my drunken states I have called for the eradication of all Moslems, Aborigines, Jews, Chinese, Maoris, Americans, capitalists, flag-burners and hippies. I'm a politically angry drunk.
Submitted by thecaes (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:30:21 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:27:13 (#)
Ranking: 2
Don't you think that the killing of men you are carpet bombing versus men who are hiding and trying to escape should be at a ration a little higher than 3:1?
*****************************
THAT'S your logic??
For REAL??
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:30:15 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Coyote (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:14:48 (#)
Ranking: 2
Personally, I'd let the guy say what he wants. Enough people don't like it, they can always slash his tires, vandalize his house, and send him exploding mail. I haven't been following the case closely at all, but he probably just did it for the attention anyway, like Ward Churchill saying the 9/11 victims deserved to die. Professors who can't think should lose their jobs, not their freedom.
===
Apparently during his early career he garnered quite a lot of praise for his research. You can download bits of his books for free from his website - haven't sampled any of them, as I'm already on enough government lists.
Might be interesting to see what the BNP has to say about all this.
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:27:13 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by ConorJS (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:16:38 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 18:44:05 (#)
Ranking: 2
I myself could be thrown into many European jails because I also refute the 6 million figure. Not the holocaust entirely, but the numbers surrounding it I believe are fabricated.
======================
Actually it was 11 million counting gypsies, socialists, homosexuals, the handicapped, and other undesirables. And it's pretty easy to validate, too. Them Nayzees were good record keepers. How can you not believe 6 million? The logistics? 20 million Russians died in WWII, and that IS verified.
==-=--=--=-==--=-=-==--==-=
The Germans were running out of men fighting on the fronts, yet supposedly they were only able to kill only twice to thrice as many Russians through carpet bombings, artillery barrages and general acts of war than find people in hiding, put them into ghettos, put them on trains, move them out to camps and slaughter them? Don't you think that the killing of men you are carpet bombing versus men who are hiding and trying to escape should be at a ration a little higher than 3:1?
Add to the fact that our sided needed to paint those dastardly Krauts as evil-doers and the motive to bend the numbers for propoganda is an added factor.
I know the holocaust hapened. I just don't believe it happened to the effect that we are told.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:26:38 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by thorpe (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:24:18 (#)
Ranking: 1
I have Williamson recorded (blind drunk obviously) as calling the Holocaust a "glorious thing". There's an anti-semitic pro-life monster that's lurking just below the surface, waiting for alcohol.
===
Why am I not suprised?
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:26:12 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by ConorJS (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:23:36 (#)
Ranking: 1
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:13:21 (#)
Ranking: 2
Yelling "fire" in a theater may start something that causes others to get hurt.
Then you bear the guilt of their injuries.
Calling a black person ethnic slurs may cause them to open a big
can of whoopass on you, and you get hurt.
======================
And why is everyone so scared of neegras?
Everyone always says, "aw yeah, you go up to a black guy ans say that and he'll kick yer ass."
What makes black people so tough
_______________________________________________________________________
You ever live in DC? Or Philly? Or Detroit? NO? Then go out and try it.
"OOOOOOOOOOOOO, that smell. The smell of heat's around you."
Submitted by thorpe (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:25:42 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
HEAT
Submitted by thorpe (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:24:18 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Williamson denies the six million number not because he thinks the Nazis' own records are invalid or the six million Jews went somewhere else, but because he says "Think of how many SS there were, now think of the maximum number of Jews they could each get in a night, now multiply that by the number of nights in World War II and you fall way short of six million" or something to that effect.
Oh he'll pretend it's about logistics but I'm gonna side with Caulaincourt on this one. I have Williamson recorded (blind drunk obviously) as calling the Holocaust a "glorious thing". There's an anti-semitic pro-life monster that's lurking just below the surface, waiting for alcohol.
Submitted by ConorJS (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:23:36 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:13:21 (#)
Ranking: 2
Yelling "fire" in a theater may start something that causes others to get hurt.
Then you bear the guilt of their injuries.
Calling a black person ethnic slurs may cause them to open a big
can of whoopass on you, and you get hurt.
======================
And why is everyone so scared of neegras?
Everyone always says, "aw yeah, you go up to a black guy ans say that and he'll kick yer ass."
What makes black people so tough
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:23:30 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
The holocaust might be a reality, but manifest destiny was CERTAINLY never used as a reason to steal land from Native Americans, nor was the US Army ever responsible for any kind of mass genocide perpetrated against them.
I stand behind that belief.
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:21:36 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Rope (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:19:30 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Coyote (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:14:48 (#)
Ranking: 2
I haven't been following the case closely at all, but he probably just did it for the attention anyway, like Ward Churchill saying the 9/11 victims deserved to die. Professors who can't think should lose their jobs, not their freedom.
===
trueFACT
It's probably worth pointing out that Irving is definitely not a respected historian. He is generally regarded as an incredible, reactionary laughing-stock.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As is Ward (I'm an Indian, mother fucker) Churchill.
Submitted by Rope (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:19:30 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Coyote (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:14:48 (#)
Ranking: 2
I haven't been following the case closely at all, but he probably just did it for the attention anyway, like Ward Churchill saying the 9/11 victims deserved to die. Professors who can't think should lose their jobs, not their freedom.
===
trueFACT
It's probably worth pointing out that Irving is definitely not a respected historian. He is generally regarded as an incredible, reactionary laughing-stock.
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:19:09 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by ConorJS (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:16:38 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 18:44:05 (#)
Ranking: 2
I myself could be thrown into many European jails because I also refute the 6 million figure. Not the holocaust entirely, but the numbers surrounding it I believe are fabricated.
======================
Actually it was 11 million counting gypsies, socialists, homosexuals, the handicapped, and other undesirables. And it's pretty easy to validate, too. Them Nayzees were good record keepers. How can you not believe 6 million? The logistics? 20 million Russians died in WWII, and that IS verified.
_________________________________________________________________
If Uberites had been around then, they would be the "undesirables.."
Submitted by ConorJS (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:16:38 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-20 18:44:05 (#)
Ranking: 2
I myself could be thrown into many European jails because I also refute the 6 million figure. Not the holocaust entirely, but the numbers surrounding it I believe are fabricated.
======================
Actually it was 11 million counting gypsies, socialists, homosexuals, the handicapped, and other undesirables. And it's pretty easy to validate, too. Them Nayzees were good record keepers. How can you not believe 6 million? The logistics? 20 million Russians died in WWII, and that IS verified.
Submitted by Coyote (user info) at 2006-02-20 19:16:31 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Whatever yo