No shit. Fucking read what I say, for Christ' sake. This is becoming tiresome.

So no, I would'nt wish those people to have their little circle-jerk conference in Europe. What I would want though, is that we don't add fuel to their fire and don't give them an excuse for gathering together because we don't let them have an opinion.

Let them speak, like any free citizen is free to, and have a horde of historian destroy all they write by opposing cold solid facts, and not some stinky censorship law.

There are certain things that should not be covered under freedom of speech. Denying the Holocaust is one of them, because it's always connected with racism.

that's what they did with Hitler

Thread: The Holocaust is serious business

mindOverMatter: "But Hitler!"

A policy like that is in place to cover a country's ass. Nevermind that many Nazis and xenophobic nationalists never left Germany after WW2, or that there is a large and growing Neo-Nazi movement in Germany nowadays. They have to have draconian laws like that in place to make it look like they're actually trying to atone for their infamous past. Genuine freedom of speech does not exist, in the same way that genuine equality didn't exist in "Animal Farm".

Obviously, the Holocaust did happen. Now should it be illegal to deny it? Is it any different than denying that we landed on the moon? Of course it is.

Example:

Group 1 decides to deny that Wal-mart has driven Safeway out of business.

Group 2 decides to deny that black people are human, and states that they are, in fact, not completely evolved into modern Homo Sapien, and they even get distinguished scientists to support their cause. Black people are then ostracized and even killed in major riots.

Group 3, fifty years after group 2's evidence is proven wrong and agreed upon that their actions were inexcusable, decides to ignore the evidence and deny that this ever happened, saying that this is impossible, considering how much effort would have to be put into such an event. They claim that the black people are just trying to victimize themselves.

Now, obviously, Group 1's denial isn't necessarily bad, Group 2's denial is hateful, Group 3's denial is also hateful because they defend Group 2's actions by willfully ignoring that they ever happened. So, since positions 2 and 3 are hateful, are they not worthy to be banned from being declared in public???

Crunchy Nachos probably said something like this in the time that I wrote it, but I'd really hate to erase all this after all the work I put into it...

Where was God during the Rwandan genocide? Where was man during the Cambodian one? I don't see laws for those, and the thousand others like them. How horrible must it get so you get your own little law? Did the victims of those genocides suffer less than the Holocaust's one?

You don't have to answer those questions, but you get my point.

How is the holocaust even up for debate?

A debate is something wherein there is reasonable doubt, right? Like saying "this might not be the case, THIS could have happened..." and possibly being right about it. Like a trial by jury where the evidence isn't substantial enough to put the plaintiff at the crime scene. Or like a scientific theory that cannot be %100 proven because there's no way to fully test the hypothesis.

But the holocaust isn't a theory, like altruism or relativity, but it is fact like the wind blowing or the sky above us. It's there, it will always be there. Just like the Japanese bombing Pearl Harbor. Just like the Americans bombing Hiroshima years later. It happened and people died.

Now don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying they shouldn't be allowed to debate this; this debate shouldn't exist.

If it is already proven that the Holocaust did happen, what motivation do people have to question it?

Yes. Yes. Me. When I'm elected.

Any other questions?

Seriously though, although I don't know if it's really a big issue here in the US, I support European laws forbidding nazi talk and holocaust denial. I assume those are against the laws because I heard it somewhere. I don't think it's a big deal here in the US because, although we have deniers and skinheads, we didn't have the holocaust here.

I think it's incredibly offensive when people use "everyone has a right to their opinion" to defend deliberate, racist lying. It's an opinion if every nazi was a baby-raper or not; it's not an opinion that millions of jews died in goddamn ovens.

lurker for super-perma-admin 2007

It's up for debate to PISS YOU OFF. There is no other reason. Of course they know that it happened, but just like there is a wave of Islamophobia spreading across Europe, with more and more European countries creating ever more brazenly discriminatory laws against certain mosque-visiting members of their populations, there is a wave of increased anger crossing the Middle East. You piss them off, they'll try to find a way to piss you off. It's really THAT simple.

Frankly, I don't think there should be a law against it anymore than there should be a law against teaching any religions or Creationism or anything else. There are plenty of people that think the moon-landings didn't occur. There are still some that believe the earth is flat. The most powerful man on earth still keenly awaits the return of Jesus Christ within his own lifetime and takes orders directly from some kind of phantom he calls "God".

So many people died from all around the world during that terrible war. I guess they were big enough to grow beyond that horror and get on with their lives.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_W...ies_by_country

HOLD ON, THREAD

This is becoming a bit too much about DENYERS VS THE WORLD OF JUSTICE. Here's an important point out friend Ulysses rose for us just a page away:

Just to try to make you thick heads realize the fact you can question something without denying it.