The title was gonna be 'Holocaust Denial - - everyone does it', but I like this one better.
So... today I watched House. Pretty good.
Thenturned over to question Time. It was so, so.
But then the question came about that historian (Irvine?) who denied the holocause in 1989, and has not been sentenced to three years in prison.
Everyone gave thoughtful answers. Then came on this Tory MP who gave a passioned reply, but left the thought out of it.
It was basically how we are all anti-semitic, and while insulting the prophet 
should be allowed, she would not mind if holocause denial became a criminal act.
She called it a criminal act that resulted in the muder of 6 million jews and others.
Come again? 6 million?
She just denied the Holocaust.
and most people are not aware that (well according to what i was taught) between 10 and 12 million people were killed. Approx 6-7 million were thought to be jewish.
So why does everyone do a disservice to this terrible attrocity to say onyl a certain race was targetted?
true - hitler had all sortsa crazy prejudices... i mean gypsies? wot did they ever do to anyone?! :roll: but it just so happens that the majority of people affected by hitler's insanity were the jews...
[size=9]I NEVER WORE IT BECAUSE OF THE TALIBAN, MOTHER. I LIKE THE [b]MODESTY[/b] AND [b]PROTECTION[/b] IT AFFORDS ME FROM THE EYES OF MEN.[/size] [url=http://www.adherents.com/lit/comics/Dust.html]Dust, X-Men[/url]
They existed... and therefore threatened the master race
Aaaaand noooow iiiiits
Springtime for Hitler and Germany
Deutschland is happy and gay!
We're marching to a faster pace
Look out, here comes the master race!
Springtime for Hitler and Germany
Rhineland's a fine land once more!
Springtime for Hitler and Germany
Watch out, Europe
We're going on tour!
Springtime for Hitler and Germany
Salam
I just watched the show because of Odone.
She is so cool.
Omrow
ah, ofcourse - poor gypsies were unfortunate enuf to have black hair and dark eyes... i think Hitler had OCD.
[size=9]I NEVER WORE IT BECAUSE OF THE TALIBAN, MOTHER. I LIKE THE [b]MODESTY[/b] AND [b]PROTECTION[/b] IT AFFORDS ME FROM THE EYES OF MEN.[/size] [url=http://www.adherents.com/lit/comics/Dust.html]Dust, X-Men[/url]
lol he also had black hair and dark eyes.
In grade school we did a school play of the Diary of Anne Frank.
I tried out for the part of Peter, and ended up getting casted as one of the Nazis.
My teacher told me it was because I "looked like a Nazi"
Is that racism?
ofcourse... the irony... makes me sick.
maybe Hitlers OCD would have lead him to kill himself in the end :twisted: (unless ofcourse he discovered blonde hair dye and contact lenses first) :roll:
[size=9]I NEVER WORE IT BECAUSE OF THE TALIBAN, MOTHER. I LIKE THE [b]MODESTY[/b] AND [b]PROTECTION[/b] IT AFFORDS ME FROM THE EYES OF MEN.[/size] [url=http://www.adherents.com/lit/comics/Dust.html]Dust, X-Men[/url]
ouch. well ur 'aryan' so wadya expect... dunno if its racism - a white person can have blue eyes or grey eyes or green eyes OR brown eyes, and have blonde hair or red hair OR brown hair... its just a coupla alleles we're talking about, they dont define ones race.
[size=9]I NEVER WORE IT BECAUSE OF THE TALIBAN, MOTHER. I LIKE THE [b]MODESTY[/b] AND [b]PROTECTION[/b] IT AFFORDS ME FROM THE EYES OF MEN.[/size] [url=http://www.adherents.com/lit/comics/Dust.html]Dust, X-Men[/url]
i dunno if this is true, but i heard that 3 years ago.. the same danish newspaper guys were offered to put a cartoon of Jesus (peace be upon him) BUT they refused because it would 'insult' christians.... :shock: what language is that? b t w He was a muslim
but some know Not
www.piczo.com/zikr
yue did say that.
now they say they lied, and the actual reason was that the comicswere not funny. The editor also said he would print holocaust comics, but was then sent on leave after saying that...
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
I think what was more shocking was the Tory Mp's position on the Irving case.
She was the only person in the room who seemed to agree with his imprisonment.
Not only that but she went even further in saying that Britain should adopt similar laws.
I think it made the Tory party look pretty stupid firstly for being a lone voice in the room and secondly because they are usually for fewer laws and small government.
I have no qualms about the austrians applying their laws. All I ask if such legislation is applied elsewhere, there should be equality.
She was hypocritical.
She singled out insulting religions/the prophet as should be allowed, and then said holocaust denial should be a criminal offense.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Hitler was a (non practising) jew, non arian, and Austrian by birth.
who else is confused?
Gentleness and kindness were never a part of anything except that it made it beautiful, and harshness was never a part of anything except that it made it ugly.
Through cheating, stealing, and lying, one may get required results but finally one becomes
Maybe he hated himself...
He did end up carrying out the final solution on himself...
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
I think it was more important that she was hypocritical on the issue of government restriction. I really do think she made the Tory party look pretty stupid.
I agree
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
I've heard that before... on his mother's side right?
Reminds me of Daniel Balint
Chalk and cheese, Admin. I find this line of reasoning vile. 'How dare you insult our prophet yet refuse to support suggestions that Jews conspire to present a false picture of the holocaust for political ends?' Chalk and cheese and vile.
[size=9]Whatever you do, know that I will always love you. Or else.[/size]
the thing is such laws are not far behind in england and the 'free' world its gonna be horrible
no room for any original thought.
the day our opinions are criminalised is soon here.
i'm gonna hastely add here that the man is bonkers the fact is the holocaust happened its non debateable and i find any degradation of its importance and belittling of its evil sickening and totally unislamic
you simply cannot compare it with anything like cartoons for Godsakes
That is why I did not say Jews.
She may have been a jew, she may have not. I do not know.
Its common ignorance that is denying the holocaust, and doing a disservice to it by ignoring the true extent of it.
If hitler had his way, I am sure my predecessors would also have been killed...
afterall I am not aryan...
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Yet they were not so the conjecture is irrelevant.
"So why does everyone do a disservice to this terrible attrocity to say onyl a certain race was targetted?"
Nobody says that. Hence a vile argument, made subtly. Maybe you are unaware of your own obscurantism in treading this line. That is gracious of me.
[size=9]Whatever you do, know that I will always love you. Or else.[/size]
well... ask anyone about the holocauset.
They will say, 'Oh yeah. 6 million jews were massacred.'
That is true. They were.
ask if anyone else was killed, and they will say 'homosexuals, and those who tried to fight the nazis. Some gypsies here and there.'
We are not made aware about others who were killed. I know the figure tts upto about 10-12 million. Who were they?
We are simply not taught this. Its an oversight of the education system IMO.
Its not a conspiracy, buta simplication too far.
Are the other deaths not worth anything?
That is my point.
(or am i still getting it wrong? if so, pease clarify. i do not mind public humiliation, aslong as i get something out of it in the end.)
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Fair enough. I believe it is common knowledge, whereas you say it is not. It is not hard to find sources detailing the rough number of people Hitler killed within each category. If you can support your claim thus, I would like you to find a credible source which states only Jews were murdered. What you might get out of it is the incredible dilemma and heartache of a Jew in assessing the motives of people who claim that Jews conspired either to bring about the holocaust or to falsify what happened, and especially those who say so by way of comparison to offense that has been given by religious mockery. If the comparison had not been raised (by Iran) in such malice, one could at least consider whether those cartoons were a mere exercise in vilifaction and a comparison might not be as inappropriate. But the malice is in the suggestion that Jews are deceitful and mischievous, and the upshot is people become antisemitic, become deceitful and mischievous. A man like Irving who has fought so hard to establish his holocaust denial as viable theory, but who then claims in court a) that he has changed his views and b) there was no harm in them, sure fits that category of the deceitful antisemite.
*1st edit: point extended* *2nd edit: couple of typos corrected*
[size=9]Whatever you do, know that I will always love you. Or else.[/size]
youre last post Admin i must say that i didnt know about the other 6 or so million on top pf the jewish 6million what planet have i been living on i'm totally stupid :oops:
so this just proves your point
There are two things I am considering about laws against holocaust denial.
The first is that it is a definitely proscribing of the freedom of speech. In law there are different kinds of speech, and the level of protection applied to speech is one of degree - depending on how "traditional" the speech is. Thus the spoken or written word, which most accurately reflects the purpose of the First Amendment recieves greater protection then the extra textual protection of expression. Holocaust denials most definitely falls into that first, most protected kind of speech, and thus to proscribe it would allow government a window into all speech at all levels.
There is that to consider.
On the other hand I have the first hand knowledge from two victims of genocide, as well as the thousands of hours of testimony from Holocaust survivors, experts and victims of racism in my own country who all warn that education of the size, extent and causes of these human tragedies plays an important roll in healing and preventing their occurance later in life. With that mountain of evidence I certainly am pursuaded.
So society must make the choice between protecting its freedoms against the [u][b]possibility[/b][/u] of government encroachment, or humanity against the [u][b]possibility[/b][/u] of repeating these tragedies.
This is a difficult decision as it weighs our value of Human life against our value of Human freedom. Fortunately I am not without guidance on the matter.
My thoughts on Abortion represent the same fundamental dynamic. While that is slightly different in that I do not recognize the legitimacy of the Right to an Abortion I cannot deny that it is considered a right by the majority of my fellow Americans and must therefore consider myself biased.
However the overwhelming factor in that decision was the scope of government intrusion. The so freedom curtailed was pointed and easily identifiable - not subject to government jurisdiction.
This is the same with Holocaust denial, which is self evidence and requires no grand degree of interpretation on the case of government involvement.
Still there is the question of setting a dangerous precedent in proscribing a human right. However again looking at my decision in the case of abortion I see that the danger of setting a precedent against proscribing the entire right did not pose a problem when weighing the compelling interest against the possibility of setting a freedom proscribing precedent.
Therefore I shall say Holocaust denial should be a crime.
I typed into google '[url=http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=who+was++killed++in+holocaust%3F&start=... was killed in the holocaust[/url]'.
First useful entry was [url=http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust]wikipedia[/url]. Good info. Gave numbers of groups. first time I hd seen them.
Second was [url=http://www.auschwitz.dk/Women/faq.htm]auschwitz.dk[/url]. 6 million jews killed.
Third was [url=http://www.holocaustforgotten.com/]forgotten Holocaust[/url], which talks about the forgotten victims. (the victims I was talking about. The ones not really known through common knowledge).
Next was profiles of jews killed, followed by a few talking about kerry relatives, Followed by[url=http://members.aol.com/dhs11/remember.html]This endearing page by an eleven year old. (I liked it)[/url]
That was followed by [url=http://www.holocaust.com.au/mm/finalsolution.htm]Australian Memories[/url], which once again focussed on only the jews.
Granted this is just a quick google, and does not mean anything. and you cannot prove that somethings are not talked about, but just go by what ypou hear people talking about.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
very nicely put August but does this mean that the denial of other atrocities in history should be made into crimes
where does one stop there is no justice nor freedom in a world which places restrictions on a persons thoughts, even God does not do that therefore i conclude that no human made law has the right to do this
Admin, if you had read your sources closely you would have seen they do not support your point.
[size=9]Whatever you do, know that I will always love you. Or else.[/size]
How many people were killed by Stalin?
what about the european collonialists in northern Africa?
I have no idea of figures though.
The American Indians?
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Pages