Irving jailed for denying Holocaust

[GhostofJimJess]

I endorse the actions of the wiesenthal institute in hunting down fleeing nazi's and providing evidence to bring these scum to justice.

Yeah, me too, dan. If nothing else, we need to continue to send the message to tomorrow's potential genocidal maniacs that they will never be able to safely run and hide, or use the passing of time as absolution or protection from accountability.

Whether that be Nazis, Hutus, henchman of Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Saddam Hussein, Ceausescu or anyone else responsible for murder on such a massive scale.

 

[FrankJames]

Whats a "slav"?

 

[sydney eagle]

Whats a "slav"?

From my Oxford Dictionary. "One of a people spread over most of Eastern Europe and including Russians,Bulgarians,Illyrians,Poles, Silesians, Pomeranians, Bohemians etc "

 

[Flag Man]

I don't think I have ever seen more reactionary, programmed garbage collectively in one thread.

"Holocaust" refers specifically and rightly to the planned extermination of the Jewish people. This was unprecedented................But the "Holocaust" was an unprecedented, clinical, targetted and focussed State policy of racial genocide. This is why it's unique.

PROOF!

Not rhetoric, not Nuremberg, not unfounded, regurgitated academia.

I WANT PROOF!

Provide documentation that the nazis had this policy!

Nazi archival evidence that supports your view!!

Are you going to tell me next that he nazis were poor archivists?

 

[Bombers 2003]

I don't think I have ever seen more reactionary, programmed garbage collectively in one thread.



PROOF!

Not rhetoric, not Nuremberg, not unfounded, regurgitated academia.

I WANT PROOF!

Provide documentation that the nazis had this policy!

Nazi archival evidence that supports your view!!

Are you going to tell me next that he nazis were poor archivists?

An example of notes taken at a conference where the Holocaust was discussed would provide evidence of that. Or Eichmann's telegrams to Berlin from Budapest are other examples.All these have been published in German Documents on Foreign Policy[GDFP]in a multi volume series by the US department of state[1945-]

 

[Flag Man]

Or Eichmann's telegrams to Berlin from Budapest are other examples.

http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/peopl...nn.adolf/transcripts//Sessions/Session-049-01

Brilliant. An entire monumental chunk of history, based on the hearsay evidence of one person and furthermore, based on a file that has never seen the light of day.


As far as any telegram goes we have a telegram from Eichman regarding scedules and destinations, a telegram instructing not to deport a Mrs Fleischman, then a telegram rescinding that instruction.

NO HOLOCAUST!

An example of notes taken at a conference where the Holocaust was discussed would provide evidence of that.

Where can these notes be found or are they the same as above?

 

[TheBloods]

PROOF!

Not rhetoric, not Nuremberg, not unfounded, regurgitated academia.

I WANT PROOF!

Provide documentation that the nazis had this policy!

So is your contention that the Nazis just randomly killed anyone and the Jews were unlucky enough to just happen to be herded into concentration camps and killed more than anyone else?

Nazi archival evidence that supports your view!!

Are you going to tell me next that he nazis were poor archivists?

No, but an incredible amount of documentation was destroyed in the battle for Berlin.

 

[dan warna]

Yeah, me too, dan. If nothing else, we need to continue to send the message to tomorrow's potential genocidal maniacs that they will never be able to safely run and hide, or use the passing of time as absolution or protection from accountability.

Whether that be Nazis, Hutus, henchman of Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Saddam Hussein, Ceausescu or anyone else responsible for murder on such a massive scale.

sadly the leaders of france, russia, china, USA, israel, pakistan etc will never be brought to justice

 

[Flag Man]

So is your contention that the Nazis just randomly killed anyone and the Jews were unlucky enough to just happen to be herded into concentration camps and killed more than anyone else?

I don't need an agenda, I NEED PROOF!

No, but an incredible amount of documentation was destroyed in the battle for Berlin.

This would include the entire works involving the state policy of the sytematic murder of an entire religious group?

A policy that was supposedly carried out over various wide ranging parts of europe?

And yet, not a single shred of documentation exists there either?

How convenient.

If only the Germans were as efficient with state documents are they were with telegrams.

So there is no proof supporting German government policy of a so called "holocaust"?

Hollywood really is the town of make believe?

 

[Bombers 2003]

http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/peopl...nn.adolf/transcripts//Sessions/Session-049-01

Brilliant. An entire monumental chunk of history, based on the hearsay evidence of one person and furthermore, based on a file that has never seen the light of day.


As far as any telegram goes we have a telegram from Eichman regarding scedules and destinations, a telegram instructing not to deport a Mrs Fleischman, then a telegram rescinding that instruction.

NO HOLOCAUST!



Where can these notes be found or are they the same as above?

All these freaking documents are in DGFP or are u a complete idiot who understands NOTHING whatsoever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

 

[sydney eagle]

I know that it will fail to satisfy some people but I recommend "The Scourge Of The Swastika" written by Lord Russell of Liverpool, a man who was Deputy Judge Advocate General to the British Army of the Rhine and gave legal advice on the prosecution of war criminals in the British zone of occupied Germany after the war.

 

[TheBloods]

I don't need an agenda, I NEED PROOF!

I often rely on the considered opinions of credentialled historians such as Ian Kershaw in areas such as this where it requires detailed analysis of archives.

He (and others) suggests that it was a "comprehensive programme of systematic annihilation of the Jews".

If you disagree with this, rather than me (or others) providing documentary evidence, it is normally the case that you should provide a counter theory first, rather than for you to simply discount the original assertion and ask for evidence in its support. Otherwise you are simply a naysayer.

So if you do not believe it was a state-sanctioned plan, as many historians do, what is your alternate explanation?

 

[GhostofJimJess]

I don't need an agenda, I NEED PROOF!

Once again I'll pose the same question I would ask of any denialist of the exitence of a policy of exterminating the Jews .... why didn't they?

It's not like the Nazi's didn't have all of the necessary resources and climate to carry out their Final Solution, and one need only read William Shapiro's "The Rise & Fall Of The Third Reich" to follow the chronology of their beliefs and subsequent actions.

So why then didn't Hitler do what so many of his odd little disciples (past and present) believe that he should have done?

 

[GhostofJimJess]

sadly the leaders of france, russia, china, USA, israel, pakistan etc will never be brought to justice

Yeah, I guess the sheer magnitude of the might of these leaders has prevented it, dan.

How would we, nowadays, as people who condemn their actions, have reacted to a current-day Mao or Stalin, with their tyrannical and mass-murderous policies and with all of those resources at their disposal?

It's not like the UN has any real bite in such matters. There is very little standing in the way of more "Holocausts" occurring tomorrow, whether they involve the extermination of Jews, Tsutsis, Chechens, Tibetans, Taiwanese, Balinese ... whatever.

 

[FrankJames]

From my Oxford Dictionary. "One of a people spread over most of Eastern Europe and including Russians,Bulgarians,Illyrians,Poles, Silesians, Pomeranians, Bohemians etc "

The Slavic peoples are defined by their linguistic attainment of the Slavic languages. They indigenously reside in Central Europe, Eastern Europe, the Balkans, and many have later settled in Northern Asia.



Ethno-cultural subdivisions
Slavs are customarily divided into three major subgroups: East Slavs, West Slavs, and South Slavs, each with a different and a diverse background based on unique history, religion and culture of particular Slavic group within them. The East Slavs may all be traced to Slavic-speaking populations that were organized as Kievan Rus' beginning in the 9th century A.D. and eventually fell under the influence of the Mongol Empire. Almost all of the South Slavs can be traced to ethnic Slavs who mixed with the local population of the Balkans (Illyrians, Thracians, Dacians and Getae) and with later invaders from the East (Bulgars, Avars, and Alans), then fell under the hegemony of the Ottoman Empire. The West Slavs (and the Slovenes) do not share either of these backgrounds, as they expanded to the West and integrated into the cultural sphere of Western (Roman Catholic) Christendom around this timeframe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavic_peoples





Firstly, as the article suggests, the slavs are only "commen" because of their linguistic ties to the slavic language.

Secondly, as the articles suggests, the southern slavs are a mixture of the people of the balkans in the areas they settled in.
So its quite clear to see, that the term slav, can only be used as a linguistic term, not an ethnic one, such as arab. This is mainly because the majority of the slavic nations are not really "slavs" anymore.

 

[medusala]

What happens is that you confuse "Holocaust" with overall casualties.

"Holocaust" refers specifically and rightly to the planned extermination of the Jewish people. This was unprecedented.

Millions of Russian POW's as well as thousands of Gypsies died at the hands of the Nazi regime - no one denies or "ignores" this. It's meticulously documented.

Well that's certainly cleared that up then.

So millions of victims in death camps who werent jews were "casualties" whilst the jews who died in such camps were part of the "holocaust".

 

[GhostofJimJess]

Well that's certainly cleared that up then.

So millions of victims in death camps who werent jews were "casualties" whilst the jews who died in such camps were part of the "holocaust".

This little conflict of semantics looks to me like just another opportunity to swing a punch at the Jews. I have never heard a single Jew with a rational mind, whether they experienced the Holocaust directly or not, who believes that they have sole ownership of the suffering inflicted by the Nazis in the death and concentration camps. And yet your implication of this seems quite evident.

I am unsure of the exact origin of the term, but my own personal understanding of the word "Holocaust" is one that the Jews coined to describe or represent their own suffering ... not that they believed that they were the only ones who actually suffered as a result of the "Holocaust".

Warning : Analogy Approaching : In Australia we use the word "mateship" to describe a mutual comraderie between the members of a friendship group or larger community. It has become synonymous with our ideal of a friendly society where everyone gets a fair go. However, any rational Aussie should realise that we do not have a monopoly on such a concept, nor even the use of the word "mateship" itself. Nevertheless the term is considered something more aligned with Aussie society than with any other.

 

[medusala]

This little conflict of semantics looks to me like just another opportunity to swing a punch at the Jews.

Not at all, refer to Hawkforce's post.

 

[sydney eagle]

Again,using the dictionary. The word "Holocaust" is given as meaning "Wholesale sacrifice" or "Whole burnt offering" or "destruction" and is quoted as deriving from the Greek . Why is the attempted mass extermination of the Jews considered to be a "holocaust' while the simultaneous attempted mass extermination of other ethnic and religious groups (Gypsys, Poles, Slavs,) Earlier in the 20th century Armenians, later tribal groups in Rwanda and other places, the "ethnic cleansing" in the Balkans NOT be so considered ?

 

[sydney eagle]

Once again I'll pose the same question I would ask of any denialist of the exitence of a policy of exterminating the Jews .... why didn't they?

It's not like the Nazi's didn't have all of the necessary resources and climate to carry out their Final Solution, and one need only read William Shapiro's "The Rise & Fall Of The Third Reich" to follow the chronology of their beliefs and subsequent actions.

So why then didn't Hitler do what so many of his odd little disciples (past and present) believe that he should have done?

Why didn't the nazis succeed in completly exterminating the various groups that they targeted ? Because brave men and women throughout occupied Europe frustrated their evil endeavours ! Very few Jews were taken from Denmark to the camps simply because the ordinary Danish population got together and MOVED them out of the country to neutral Sweden, virtually overnight ! Many Jews escaped from Holland because the ordinary population of Holland sheltered them and arranged for them to escape to Britain. THe man who was to become Pope John Paul II and many other religious leaders throughout Europe made great efforts to help people to escape the holocaust. THey DID (almost) succeed in exterminating their FIRST targeted group, the mentally ill in Germany, because there was no-one to help them !

 

[TheBloods]

This little conflict of semantics looks to me like just another opportunity to swing a punch at the Jews. I have never heard a single Jew with a rational mind, whether they experienced the Holocaust directly or not, who believes that they have sole ownership of the suffering inflicted by the Nazis in the death and concentration camps. And yet your implication of this seems quite evident.

I am unsure of the exact origin of the term, but my own personal understanding of the word "Holocaust" is one that the Jews coined to describe or represent their own suffering ... not that they believed that they were the only ones who actually suffered as a result of the "Holocaust".

Another point is that some historians prefer to use what they consider to be a more accurate word - genocide - rather than holocaust for exactly this sort of reason.

 

[medusala]

Another point is that some historians prefer to use what they consider to be a more accurate word - genocide - rather than holocaust for exactly this sort of reason.

So the stolen generation can be equated with the holocaust?

 

[TheBloods]

So the stolen generation can be equated with the holocaust?

Only if you consider it genocide.

Even if you do, then the methods are markedly different.

So a comparison would be invalid in most respects.

 

[dan warna]

This thread has become stupid while folks argue over semantics
and anti semites hide their racism in sophistry

 

[Flag Man]

This thread has become stupid while folks argue over semantics
and anti semites hide their racism in sophistry

Some of you people need to watch less Speilberg and read more Voltaire.