Australian Holocaust deniers in Tehran

[- PC -]

Judge for yourself.

It was anti-war and not in the slightest bit disturbing.

Hmmm I wouldnt have said anti-war. I would have thought Leunig equated Israel 2002 with the Nazis in 1942. He could have stayed anti-war if he had left the Auschwitz-Israel references out

But yeah not disturbing at all

 

[MrMeaner]

RE: Mr Meaner, are you thinking of Dr. Death, the guy that a doco was made on a while back (same director as Thin Blue Line & Fog of War). Cant remember his real name but he tested for Zyklon B I think and testified in court that there was no evidence of it.

EDIT: This might be the guy

http://imdb.com/title/tt0192335/

Great filmmaker, he directed Brief History of Time as well.

Yes and no. Leuchter was the guy I was thinking of. That's the 'scientist' not the filmmaker. In her book, Lipstadt expresses concern at the way that Morris seemingly lets Leuchter's statements stand without any editorial comment or other contradiction.

Anyway, Robert van Pelt pretty comprehensively debunked Leuchter's assertions in his report to court in Irving v Penguin Books and Lipstadt. If anyone is interested, a copy of the report can be found here. That site also contains copies of all the expert evidence presented by Penguin and Lipstadt. If anyone thinks that Irving is an historian, I would suggest that they read Richard Evans's report. It systematically destroys any reputation that Irving may have had in that regard by highlighting all of his deliberate distortions.

All that said, I should say that I do not support the criminalisation of holocaust denial. To make it a criminal offence only serves to make martyrs of the deniers. Thus, it is not an effective means of combating denial. What is needed is fearless and comprehensive rebuttal. For that Lipstadt and Penguin should be held up as exemplars.

 

[Didga]

Theodor Herzl, Founder of Zionism in 1897:

“It is essential that the sufferings of Jews. . . become worse. . . this will assist in realization of our plans. . . I have an excellent idea. . . I shall induce anti-semites to liquidate Jewish wealth. . . The anti-semites will assist us thereby in that they will strengthen the persecution and oppression of Jews. The anti-semites shall be our best friends”.

-- From Herzl's Diary

The truth needs no laws to protect it

I am not racist, xenophobic, homophobic, or prejudiced against any race, creed, or national origin. I am prejudiced only against criminals.

 

[- PC -]

Apparently there are also some Rabbis attending


Reads like a roll call of SPECTRE or KAOS..surprised Kim isnt there as well


An international cast of established Holocaust deniers and implacable foes of Israel were given an open forum by Iran yesterday to support Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's contention that the murder of six million Jews by the Nazis was a "myth".

They included David Duke, a former imperial wizard of the Ku Klux Klan; Robert Faurisson, a French lecturer stripped of his academic tenure for his anti-Holocaust opinions; and Michele Renouf, a London-based associate of the British author David Irving. Irving is currently serving a jail sentence for Holocaust denial in Austria.

A group of radical anti-Zionist rabbis, Jews United Against Israel, who oppose a Jewish state on religious grounds, were given a prominent role. Among them was Rabbi Ahron Cohen, a retired former lecturer at the Jewish religious college in Hitchin, Hertfordshire. Rabbi Cohen acknowledged that the Holocaust had happened but said he saw nothing anti-semitic in Mr Ahmadinejad's comments.

 

[Didga]

The correct term by the way is Holocaust revisionist as no-one is denying that it happened. Just the numbers killed are under question.

The constant use of the holocaust by the zionists to excuse their ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people is a bigger issue.

The use of Holocaust denial laws and the actions of the Anti-Defamation League in suppressing all that speak out against zionism and the Palestinian genocide again has nothing to do with saying less than 6 million Jews actually died.

 

[MrMeaner]

The correct term by the way is Holocaust revisionist as no-one is denying that it happened. Just the numbers killed are under question.

It depends who is using it. Irving would call himself a revisionist. I would call him a denier (actually, depending on which day and which quote for which audience you hear or read, he may not be a denier - however, his overall history is predminantly denial).

 

[MrMeaner]

...and in any case, what we can safely say about most attendees (obviously not all in the case of the Rabbis attending) is that they are anti-semites, whether they assert that the numbers killed during the Holocaust were small or deny that there ever was a Holocaust.

Ultimately, whether you support Israel or not, denial of the Holocaust or asserting that it was not a big deal (as those pushing the line that small numbers of Jews were killed do) is greatly hurtful to those who suffered.

When faced with that prospect, the memory of those killed must be protected. And we must be made to remember, however bad we are at avoiding re-occurrences.

 

[- PC -]

When faced with that prospect, the memory of those killed must be protected. And we must be made to remember, however bad we are at avoiding re-occurrences.

Why above the 20 million Russians, or the Hutus, or the Armenians?

 

[MrMeaner]

Why above the 20 million Russians, or the Hutus, or the Armenians?

Is anyone denying their suffering?

These events should also be remembered. Hopefully, we will eventually see the light and stop repeating the slaughter.

 

[just maybe]

Why above the 20 million Russians, or the Hutus, or the Armenians?

Very good question.

One must ask why special treatment is afforded to the Jews, to the extent they were given a homeland in someone's else's land.

Which of the groups mentioned above were subsequently given a homeland based on the 'appropriation' of other peoples' land?

None.

 

[Didga]

Hopefully, we will eventually see the light and stop repeating the slaughter.

I think this is the true irony, the fact that the zionists ARE repeating the slaughter with the Palestinian genocide using the holocaust as a political shield from critism.

 

[stickman11]

Can't see what the problem is. If people want to deny the holocaust, so be it. I think people hide behind history far too much. Look at Israle, they bomb the crap out of innocent people just to get rid of a few terrorists. They can hardly have a sook about the past now, can they.

 

[smooking39]

Can't see what the problem is. If people want to deny the holocaust, so be it. I think people hide behind history far too much. Look at Israle, they bomb the crap out of innocent people just to get rid of a few terrorists. They can hardly have a sook about the past now, can they.

But they dont target palestinians because they are palestinians. That is the fundamental difference. The other major difference is they havent killed 6 million of them.

 

[just maybe]

But they dont target palestinians because they are palestinians.

Er, yes they do.

That is the fundamental difference. The other major difference is they havent killed 6 million of them.

So clearly Martin Bryant is a good bloke because he hasn't killed as many people as Saddam.

 

[smooking39]

Er, yes they do.

err no they don't

 

[smooking39]

Er, yes they do.



So clearly Martin Bryant is a good bloke because he hasn't killed as many people as Saddam.

If you start denying what Martin Bryant you will offend 35 peoples familys directly. If you start denying the holocaust u will offend 6 million peoples family.

 

[Freo Big Fella]

Why not? 60 years have passed and we want to tip toe around it still?

People like Irving should be laughed at , but he should also be allowed to question. Yes we know the holocaust happened, but have we really found out why?

Was it racial cleansing? Was it economic cleansing? Or was it a combination of both?

I did a unit on the Holocaust last year, there's fantastic literature on both the Holocaust and it's historical and cultural impact; I urge anyone interested to look at anything by Raul Hillberg, Norman Finkelstein or Omer Bartov.

It's obviously not an original idea, but since then I've come to think of the broad usage of "holocaust denial" as a cultural defense mechanism that says as much about the user as it does about the target.

 

[just maybe]

If you start denying what Martin Bryant you will offend 35 peoples familys directly. If you start denying the holocaust u will offend 6 million peoples family.

Who said anything about denial?

You're getting desperate now. Even adding 1 million to the official figure.

 

[IntheNet]

Can't see what the problem is. If people want to deny the holocaust, so be it.

Sorry stickman... denial is not a choice here... the Holocaust happened and six million humans died. Denial of such a horror is yet another reason that terrorist leader President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad needs to be removed. Mahmoud's denial of it and his continual antagonization of Israel and arming of insurgents in Iraq are the reasons his casket is now being measured and built... Mahmoud is a stumbling block toward peace and his fostering of reality deniers (deniers of the Holocaust) mean that his guilt is tangible...

Even Iranian students are beginning to heckle Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and call for his removal...

Israel would be more than justified to end this madman's reign of terror... The world waits...

 

[- PC -]

Even Iranian students are beginning to heckle Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and call for his removal...

Israel would be more than justified to end this madman's reign of terror... The world waits...

Even American students are beginning to heckle George Bush and call for his removal...

Israel would be more than justified to end this madmans reign of terror... the world waits..

 

[audas]

What a bunch of garbage.

First off, he was actually indicted for claiming less Jews were killed than official figures. This is clear as day. NOT on denial. Imprisonment for denial of the holocaust when there is no imprisonment for the denial or Stalins starvation tactics against the Baltic's, the denial of WW 2 aggression by the Japanese or the denial that the use of atomic weapons against Hiroshima and Nagasaki was unwarranted are all completely legal. Complete hypocracy which flies in the face of all common sense designed only to assuage guilt and to reserve denial of war crimes as illegal for only one single crime wreaks of favouritism. A perverse term to use in such circumstances but what else can one say.

Secondly for those that haven't been there Aushwitz 1 is what is being referred to where 1.2million died, even this figure is totally wrong as it was around the 200,000.

Thirdly Auschwitz 2 (Berkenhau) was the main site built after the original as the final solution and was only operating for 6 months. There were numerous reason why it was IMPOSSIBLE for the number of people gassed and burnt could not have been as high as claimed, starting with the impossibility based on the available equipment, time frame etc. Also considering one of the oven/gas chambers was destroyed in an uprising. It was as stated here, by Irving and at the memorial itself around 1.2million. There were numerous other sites where they were gassed and put to death by other means all over German occupied Europe. The truth is obfuscated, and for everyone sake we should remain open to research and the truth. Be that 5.5million Jews or 6.5million.

Surely the figures are not all that matter. It must be the lesson.

And finally, how DARE, people use the Holocaust in any reference or in any terms when relating to the absolute atrocities being perpetrated everyday in the middle east by Israel. The actions of those perpetrating these despicable acts of inhumanity should, and will, sit right along side all the other barbarous murderers from history. They will be judged accordingly and for anyone with even the remotest sense of justice have already been placed squarely outside the bounds of any moral decency whatsoever.

The acts perpetrated against the Polish, gay, Russian, elderly, female, young, Greek, German, intellectual, Austrian, academic, Weak, Gypsie, Twin or Jew are all equally offensive, and for Jews to hijack this human tragedy, to usurp it for the defense of the inexcusable, is an affront to all those who died despite their lack of Hebrew. It is shameful that non Jews, such as white Anglo Saxon Christians, the ones that perpetrated the acts, or any other race or religion, should be denied the freedom to draw upon an historical example of how not to treat people due to its exclusive use for Jewry. Surely an equally perverse denial as that being discussed.

From the inhumanity of the ghettos to the slaughter of innocents, we all have equal rights in remembering this great tragedy, especially when we refer to it in our attempts to quash present crimes against humanity such as those being perpetrated daily against the Palestinian people.

There is, and should be no denying what happened in WW2, nor should there be any denying that it was a barbarous act against the Jews, but let us never forget that every war has been fought against the people of some nation or religion of some kind. The jews are not the only people history to have suffered, and they have not suffered more than anyone else, they are not immune to the moral responsibilities the rest of us abide by. There is no exemption from humanity no matter how arduous the torment.

62 million people died in that war, not just the Jews at Auschwitz. We should all remember, lest we forget, and allowing Israel to continue its murderous rampage seems to be forgetting.

 

[MrMeaner]

Thirdly Auschwitz 2 (Berkenhau) was the main site built after the original as the final solution and was only operating for 6 months. There were numerous reason why it was IMPOSSIBLE for the number of people gassed and burnt could not have been as high as claimed, starting with the impossibility based on the available equipment, time frame etc. Also considering one of the oven/gas chambers was destroyed in an uprising. It was as stated here, by Irving and at the memorial itself around 1.2million. There were numerous other sites where they were gassed and put to death by other means all over German occupied Europe. The truth is obfuscated, and for everyone sake we should remain open to research and the truth. Be that 5.5million Jews or 6.5million.

Read the van Pelt report and transcript of his testimony in Irving v Pengiun Books. He effectively (for mine) debunks assertions that it was impossible to execute and cremate such large numbers of people in Auschwitz-Birkenau.

On the rest of your post, are you saying that Israel's treatment of the Palestinian people is actually worse than National Socialist Germany's treatment of Europe's jewish population?

FWIW, I think that Israel's treatment of the Palestinian people is horrendous. I also think that too often Israel's supporters hide behind claims of anti-semitism and memories of the Holocaust to deflect and prevent criticism of their country and government. However, I cannot agree with the suggestion that Israel's actions towards Palestine and Israel's neighbours is somehow equivalent to the systematic attempt to destroy a race of people.

Further, the thing that makes the Holocaust particularly horrific for me is the manner in which it evolved from institutionalised racism to killing, to the mechanisation and industrialisation of execution.

As to the assertion that these people are just revising the numbers down, if you look at it out of context, that might be so. However, most of those labelled as 'revisionists' or 'deniers' are doing so with the intention of belittling the suffering caused by Nazi Germany. They believe that if they can convince people that Germany (and its puppets) 'only' killed x number of people, they will be able to argue that it is morally equivalent to the acts of the Allies during the war (eg Dresden). This is certainly Irving's tactic

Finally, as I said earlier, I do not think that anyone should be gaoled for holding a belief or idea. However, when it comes to Holocaust deniers (and others who attempt to gloss over or deny a nation's, a government's or a people's culpability for similar heinous crimes) they must be met and their claims refuted at every opportunity.

 

[just maybe]

Meaner, I think he is saying not that what Israel is doing is worse, but that it is not 'better', it is still evil, and the Israelis are belittling the memory of those who did die - Jew and non-Jew alike - by using the Holocaust as a continual excuse for their oppression of Palestine.

 

[MrMeaner]

Reading it again, you're probably right. I have heard others trying to draw a moral equivalence between the two and my comments stand in relation to them (although I'm not sure if they are reflected in any of the posts here).

I stand by my other comments though.

 

[smooking39]

Who said anything about denial?

You're getting desperate now. Even adding 1 million to the official figure.

How am i adding an extra million people to the official death toll? I just use 6 million because that is the number that is most commonly talked about and reconised.