Holocaust Deniers Gather in Iran

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".

Most amazing jew boots

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...

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by BigHairyFeet

I think the quote from the Nuremberg trials demonstrates what I'm trying to say most eloquently:

"At Auschwitz, where was God?"

"Where was man?"

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.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by Devoxycontin

Even with all this evidence, why can't people talk about the possibility that it didn't happen?

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.

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by Devoxycontin

The KKK is a big proponent of Hate Speech but to limit their speech limits everyone's speech. Where does one draw the line? They draw the line when violence occurs, when members are encouraged to go out and lynch. If they're not instigating violence why is the government stepping in to censor them?

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

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by Devoxycontin

So creationists shouldn't be allowed to speak? People who deny the moon landing shouldn't be allowed to speak? Who defines what is truth and what is fact? When do governments get to decide what "can't be discussed" ever?

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

FELIPE NO

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

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

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:

Originally Posted by Ulysses

I heard an Iranian ambassador say something along the lines of "We are testing the belief that the Holocaust occurred, and that if it did, exactly how many jews died in it's duration." So they aren't denying that it occurred outright, because otherwise they wouldn't entertain the possibility that it did in fact happen. I think they are contesting the figures too. People never seem to recall the huge numbers of gypsies, homosexuals, africans and other ethnicities that also perished in the death-camps.

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

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Ok, since we're going back to page one, do I have to quote my own entry as well? (As it was written in reply to that notion, among other things.)

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by BigHairyFeet

I get your point. Your point is: how in the world does this thing keep happening, right? That's why we have laws against racism, to prevent slavery from happening all over the U.S again. Instead there's alot of racial tension, but African Americans are a hell of alot better off now. Don't you see then, that essentially, by cheapening the events of the 1940s, you are allowing stuff to start seeping through the cracks? Resurgence of nazi symbols in germany, allowing the Holocaust to be debated--its like a rotting ceiling that's starting to crack and flake away.

So we take lessons from our buddy Staline and limit free speech? Swell.

I don't think it's how you settle things on long term, no.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Cyrus XIII

Ok, since we're going back to page one, do I have to quote my own entry as well? (As it was written in reply to that notion, among other things.)

Sorry, I actually totally missed your post from the beginning. It's actually quite revealing of what nonsense this whole debate is, since no one actually knows what he's talking about. No one can define the exact laws towards Holocaust of all countries, nor can anyone tell what this conference actually is and what's actually been discussed in it, since we don't have transcripts. I'm withdrawing for now, anyway. (zzz)

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by Devoxycontin

Why can't they question it? Who is it physically hurting to question the events of the Holocaust? What does it matter what their motivation is when they should have the right to say it?

Considering that it would indeed be hateful to deny the events (And I say "deny", because questioning is rather useless considering that the answers are already in full view of those who want to know.), it should be made illegal. That, of course, depends on what your foundation for morality is, though.

Originally Posted by Crunchy Nachos

I really like how you put it!

Thank you.

Originally Posted by niki

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

You may not have realized this, but it's rather useless to question when all the answers are laid out in front of you. So logically, it would have to be denial. Plus, what does it matter whether 100,000 Jews died in the Holocaust of 1,000,000 (Or 6,000,000)? Does this change the fact that there was a Holocaust? No.

I was speaking idiomatically.

To be fair, niki, a lot of people in the US say that they are merely questioning the safety of abortions, for example, and then bust out a bunch of bullshit about how abortions will give you cancer. The same thing happens with evolution, with global warming, lots of things. Basically that's the reason for the cynicism, well that and

Quote:

"We are testing the belief that the Holocaust occurred, and that if it did, exactly how many jews died in it's duration."

Ifs speak louder than other words. Call me pedantic if you want, I'm just having a hard time believing that they won't come to some startling revelation that only a few hundred thousand jews died if anything.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

As I said, but you people are deftly ignoring, the whole point is to piss you off. I'd say it's a glorious victory to Iran so far. Iranians are amongst the most highly educated populations in the world, and they inhabit lands where human civilisation first took root after thousands of years of nomadism; a country that was a seat of learning and scientific advancement for centuries. Their leader is a wily schemer who knows how to push your buttons. Do not make the mistake of assuming that they're stupid, because they are not. It is a (frankly not that subtle) attempt to get you riled up, and it succeeded.

If you are going to have laws that limit one's freedom of speech, let's play fair about it and restrict the freedom for people to say other inflammatory or obviously incorrect things, or not at all. Let's not play favourites when it suits us.

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by Ulysses

As I said, but you people are deftly ignoring, the whole point is to piss you off. I'd say it's a glorious victory to Iran so far. Iranians are amongst the most highly educated populations in the world, and they inhabit lands where human civilisation first took root after thousands of years of nomadism; a country that was a seat of learning and scientific advancement for centuries. Their leader is a wily schemer who knows how to push your buttons. Do not make the mistake of assuming that they're stupid, because they are not. It is a (frankly not that subtle) attempt to get you riled up, and it succeeded.

Consider an internet forum socially engineered, then. That Iran is always out to get Gamingforce!

oh my god, that explains devilgobox!

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Originally Posted by a lurker

Ifs speak louder than other words. Call me pedantic if you want, I'm just having a hard time believing that they won't come to some startling revelation that only a few hundred thousand jews died if anything.

Do you really give a shit? You obvious KNOW that it occurred. This president is at best only going to be able to convince a minority of idiots in his own country that it didn't happen, if that. These people are inconsequential to you. It shouldn't bother you, just like it apparently doesn't bother you that the KKK in your own country continues to spread hatred, or that the Neo Nazis in Germany spout utter bullshit about homosexuals.

We won't go back to lynchings not because there are laws in place to specifically stop an organisation intent on commiting those acts, but because there are already in place very old laws. MURDER IS A CRIME. That is more than enough to be able to lock these bastards up. The argument changes into whether or not a person should get a longer sentence for a "hate-crime". That has been up for debate here in the past, so I won't dredge it up again.

Double Post:

Originally Posted by BigHairyFeet

I get it, you're the Propaganda Minister right? This is the country that's so smart they've not only gotten the historians riled up, they've also got the U.S and E.U goverments riled up over the theat of a nation supporting the destruction of Israel and the U.S holding a nuke in their hand. I think that's absolutely brilliant of Iran. When they've been wiped off the map and/or invaded, and the world has collectively shat on their leaders, we'll come back to your post and marvel at how correct your analysis was

I'm not the propaganda minister, obviously. Isn't the US the same country that is going, cap in hand to its two greatest enemies, asking that they intervene in Iraq to bring order to it? A country the US has failed to subjugate despite their having no weapons of mass destruction at all? Has any nuclear power yet been invaded that recently acquired that capability (hello Pakistan - probably harbouring Bin Laden himself)? Posturing is fine and dandy, and so are big impressive words. Talk is cheap; actions speak louder.

I in no way ADVOCATE the decision of the Iranian government to question the holocaust, but if we claim to be so much better than them, let them mess around and have their fun. As I have said, their decisions whatever they turn out to be, are utterly inconsequential to the world at large.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by BigHairyFeet

Yes it is, both because 99% of people won't fight it if it's restricted and because they're offended by the other 1% who believe otherwise.

Weren't governments made to protect the rights of the minority?

There's nowhere I can't reach.

A stupid debate in the Palace? Surprise surprise, and I wondered why nobody posts here any more.

You guys do know that this meeting is being attended by anti-Zionist Jews, right? Basically the biggest motive behind holocaust denial is to establish that the actual impact of the Holocaust doesn't justify Zionist agendas and the continued support of Israel. More specifically for Ahmadinejad, as Ulysses has pointed out, it's to raise the ire of Westerners, and it's worked well enough to start this retarded thread over a :whocares: event. I mean, christ, David Duke, former Grand Wizard of the KKK and Louisiana politician attended the convention, and CNN is reporting it as if it's some kind of big deal. David Duke a Holocaust denier? I would've never thought!

Nevermind here, that Rock is German, and attempting to atone for the sins of his Jew-gassing grandpa by convincing us very loudly that the Holocaust happened, or that several Western countries have strong Zionist lobbies which regardless of any central organization are nonetheless loud enough to get measures like the French censorship laws put into place.

When Devo said "Your rights stop where my feelings begin" (go spacemoose), it was quite poignant, because I don't think you guys understand just how many "hurtful" opinions regarding the past there are to minority groups. If Radical Feminists controlled the country they'd probably outlaw any assertion of Universal Patriarchy, or if say, blacks became a vocal censorship lobby, then you could say bye-bye to Gone With the Wind and The North and South for their portrayal of the Plantation Myth.

Nobody has the right to dictate what is and what isn't open for discussion, irregardless of how much imperical evidence is stacked against an opinion. It's the same reason I'm not closing this thread instantaneously for sheer retardedness, because it's more beneficial for the community to see you guys weep from your vaginas for all the poor Jews and Gypsies and Fags and Rubber Duckies that might get their feelings hurt because of what a couple of douchebags in Iran said about the Holocaust.

There should never be limits to freedom of speech, period. Limiting one's entitlement to an opinion works sort of like the point/counterpoints to abortion. If you abort a baby you could be aborting the guy who cures cancer, consequently you could also be aborting the guy who kills 15 families with a bayonet in their homes. Draconian infringements on free expression didn't work forever for the Church, and there's nothing to suggest that outlawing Holocaust-denial actually suppresses discourse regarding the subject in any clear way. In fact, eliminating its discussion in the public sphere does more to help its survival, since there's no intellectual discourse that can use the imperical evidence you jerks keep yelling about against Holocaust-denial literature. Instead you've got sub-cultures sharing their views on the internet and festering outside the scrutiny of society at large. Has it ever occurred to you filthy Germans that outlawing the Nazi Party is the very reason Germany has such a problem with Neo-Nazism? Of course not, though, because prohibition works for drugs, right?

Dumbasses.

Quote:

Weren't governments made to protect the rights of the minority?

According to Locke, governments were made to protect people in exchange for their freedom. Constitutions are made to protect minority rights. (usually)

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Bradylama

Nevermind here, that Rock is German, and attempting to atone for the sins of his Jew-gassing grandpa by convincing us very loudly that the Holocaust happened, or that several Western countries have strong Zionist lobbies which regardless of any central organization are nonetheless loud enough to get measures like the French censorship laws put into place.

Might be more of the latter, actually. I was merely posting here because niki sounded like that meeting in Iran was some sort of a good and objective thing that should have been allowed to take place in Europe.

Also note that Holocaust deniers aren't actually prosecuted as criminals here, but rather kept from publishing books and holding public speeches about the issue. According to German law, these people are charged with slander or libel or something like that. I think it's only fair.

Quote:

Has it ever occurred to you filthy Germans that outlawing the Nazi Party is the very reason Germany has such a problem with Neo-Nazism? Of course not, though, because prohibition works for drugs, right?

Interestingly, the "Nazi Party" (NPD) isn't even outlawed in Germany. I think that's a good thing.

Most amazing jew boots

For BigHairyFeet :

You sir, are a moron. Did you even read what i said?

Anything is subject to debate. What i'm advocating is the freedom to discuss anything. Do not twist my words.

And what i said meant that i think THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE for the deaths REGARDLESS of wether it was by burning, toxins, or just because of imprisonment. The Nazis ARE responsible. So in effect i was arguing AGAINST trying to locate the "real" reason for their death, because regardless of that reason, the nazis ARE responsible.

I just hate exaggeration, and there's a possibility of exaggeration. It's not as flat-out proven as the earth being round, it's debatable. THE NUMBERS are debatable.

Double Post:

Originally Posted by Bradylama

There should never be limits to freedom of speech, period.

Well fucking said.

Brady is basically saying what i have in mind but in greater detail. How anyone could take another point of view is beyond me. Aren't you all FOR freedom of speech?

I was speaking idiomatically.

Quote:

niki sounded like that meeting in Iran was some sort of a good and objective thing that should have been allowed to take place in Europe.

And why shouldn't it have been? If they had the money to support the thing, and could find an institution willing to host the convention, there shouldn't be any good reason to stop the convention from taking place in Europe. Do you really think they're going to be able to convince more people than what have already been drawn to the movement that the Holocaust didn't really happen? If the prospect of Holocaust denial is so impossible to fathom to Europeans, then how does it justify legislating against it?

I forget, of course, that Libertine values don't apply to Europe, just the populist ones.

Quote:

According to German law, these people are charged with slander or libel or something like that. I think it's only fair.

But it's not fair. Holocaust denial doesn't damagingly misrepresent anybody, because the character of Holocaust survivors aren't being called into question. What is being called into question, is whether or not the Holocaust actually happened, or was severe enough to justify the creation of a Jewish nation-state and its continued support. The only affront Holocaust denial perpetrates is the assault on your white guilt and Zionist interests. Surely Holocaust survivors have nothing to prove.

Quote:

Interestingly, the "Nazi Party" (NPD) isn't even outlawed in Germany.

The Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei is outlawed in Germany. The Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands can only be considered an ideological predecessor to the outlawed organization, which is the very reason you morons have tried to outlaw the thing for decades and turn it into a counter-culture.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

The NSDAP doesn't even exist anymore, Brady. And what sense would it make to form such a party if you can just join the NPD instead?

Also, most Germans agree that outlawing them is wrong. So don't sound like "we" Germans are to blame for it.

FELIPE NO

The logical conclusion to Holocaust denial is that Holocaust survivors are either liars or wrong. Holocaust denial doesn't represent survivors, however. Holocaust denial is an opinion regarding an historical event, and doesn't constitute libel or slander unless the claim is being made that Holocaust survivors are dirty liars.

I am, of course, making this value judgement based on American laws where the Supreme Court established that the plaintiffs must prove malicious intent, and that no states accept libel cases on the behalf of groups. It may be ethnocentric, but then we're the country that respects freedom of expression the most on this planet, despite the hiccups, so I feel confident in saying that American perspective of libel is the most respectful of the freedom of expression.

If Holocaust denial counts as libel in Germany, then it stands to reason that the same would apply to anti-semitism and political radicalism, since making derogatory remarks about Jews or SPD voters could constitute untruthful malicious statements concerning a group of people.

Quote:

The NSDAP doesn't even exist anymore, Brady. And what sense would it make to form such a party if you can just join the NPD instead?

That doesn't change the fact that the Nazi Party is illegal, and that it is impossible for any kind of Nazi movement to acquire political legitimacy. You can effectively remove Neo-Nazism from members of the NPD, because at the time of its destruction, the Nazi Party was a cult of personality centered around Hitler, and Neo-Nazis tend to emulate the late Nazi period and deify Hitler.

Quote:

Also, most Germans agree that outlawing them is wrong. So don't sound like "we" Germans are to blame for it.

You elected the government that attempted the ban, therefore by extension people like Shcroeder who have proposed the possibility of another ban represent their constituents, being German voters.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Originally Posted by Ulysses

We won't go back to lynchings not because there are laws in place to specifically stop an organisation intent on commiting those acts, but because there are already in place very old laws. MURDER IS A CRIME.

That's wonderful. Did I mention lynching jews? Because I didn't. I just said that it's reasonable to be offended at something you yourself said was intended to be offensive.

Originally Posted by Bradylama

There should never be limits to freedom of speech, period.

shouting fire in a theater, slander/libel, etc.

Quote:

David Duke, former Grand Wizard of the KKK and Louisiana politician

also lol

Jam it back in, in the dark.

There is a western law precedent that you can limit free speech, where doing so protects the ability of others to speak freely. i.e. you can limit horribly racist demonstrations, so that minorities do not feel so set-upon by the majority that they are afraid to speak their mind.

Therefore, a Holocaust-discussion bill might have made sense decades ago, where the temptation still existed to blame the Jews for every damn thing. It doesn't really matter much anymore. If Iran wants to play tit-for-tat for some newspaper cartoons like a little baby, and invite some number-crunchers from Mel Gibson's phonebook, whatever. I think* in the countries that are democratic enough to consider an anti-holocaust bill, anti-semitism is so dead that you don't need it anymore.

I still agree with putting anti-holocaust gradeschool history teachers in jail, though.

*feel free to correct if I'm wrong

There's nowhere I can't reach.