• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Banned Book:The Hoax of the Twentieth Century

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mondial said:
The same people who criticise Arthur Butz for not being a historian and writing The Hoax of the Twentieth Century are the same ones who say nothing about Raul Hilberg who is supposed to have written the "definitive" account of the holocaust called The Destruction of the European Jews. He wasn't a historian either but that doesn't bother people with double standards.
Click to expand...

The difference being Hilberg wasn't lying.
 
Foolmewunz said:
I've told you a million times not to exaggerate, Bob!:D



Deranged? Liar?

Do you always have this much trouble with hyperbole? You've never seen someone overdo it, verbally, in a moment of anger? "You make me so mad, I could strangle you".... What parent or loved one hasn't said that, I ask you?
Click to expand...

Exactly.
Being emotional in a moment is not a crime. I may be alot of things but a liar is not one of them. Clearly you know nothing of writing expression, Shakespeare wrote that Juliet was an angel, when, obviously, she wasn't. Does that make him a liar?
 
Film director Oliver Stone said Hollywood makes endless movies condemninig nazism but at the same time gives Stalin a free pass. Tell me something I don't know, Oliver. He was forced to apologise by the Jews who "don't" control Hollywood but that's not enough they now seek to blacklist him. www.thewrap.com/media/column-post/exclusive-haim-saban-stone-should-join-mel-gibson-retirement-19614
Sayanim, hasbarats and Israeli bootlickers take note. Freedom of speech is for everyone and that includes holocaust revisionists and Oliver Stone!
The Tragic Death of a Night Porter How Poland Mistreats Holocaust Revisionists http://piotrbein.wordpress.com/2010/07/29/the-tragic-death-of-a-night-porter/
Holocaust revisionists have been subjected to murder, physical assault, arson attacks, intimidation, censorship and imprisonment. The Zionist Terror Network www.ihr.org/books/ztn.html
 
Headline: OLIVER STONE DOESN'T MAKE FILM ABOUT STALINISM!


Is that your main beef, hmmm?
 
eerok said:
You forgot UTTER contempt and COMPLETE dismissal.
Click to expand...

fixed.gif
 
Mondial said:
There were no holocaust movies in the 1940's, 50's or 60's and then circa 1974 Did Six Million Really Die?

Ladewig said:
Why did you post this claim before checking its accuracy? It seems so ridiculous that assert something that is so overwhelmingly easy to disprove.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I didn't mean it as a rhetorical question. I really want to know why you posted something without doing any checking at all?
 
Mondial said:
...not a week goes by without a movie, tv show or documentary about the subject. Total overkill.
Click to expand...

Extremely poor choice of wording


Mondial said:
The victims of Stalin vastly outnumber those of Hitler but there is no comparable amount of film or tv time for them.
Click to expand...

That is because the western film industry is dominated by US companies, followed by the French and British, Italian, German and Russian. Film makers are most interested in the wars of their own countries. USA, UK, France and Italy never fought the Russians, but except Italy all fought Hitler.

German film making is not as obsessed with war as are the Americans and British, but watching documentaries and movies on TV here, I am under the impression that the war in the east is well represented. Ok, that still does not account for the things Stalin did internally. The Russians finally have not been an open, democratic and self-critical lot for very long. Plus, I am in no position to judge the output of modern Russian film making.
 
Mondial said:
The same people who criticise Arthur Butz for not being a historian and writing The Hoax of the Twentieth Century are the same ones who say nothing about Raul Hilberg who is supposed to have written the "definitive" account of the holocaust called The Destruction of the European Jews. He wasn't a historian either but that doesn't bother people with double standards.
Click to expand...

I admit that I have a double standard. I will give a pass to someone without academic credentials who publishes the truth, but not to hate-spewing, lying, neo-nazi scumbags.
 
Oystein said:
Extremely poor choice of wording




That is because the western film industry is dominated by US companies, followed by the French and British, Italian, German and Russian. Film makers are most interested in the wars of their own countries. USA, UK, France and Italy never fought the Russians, but except Italy all fought Hitler.

German film making is not as obsessed with war as are the Americans and British, but watching documentaries and movies on TV here, I am under the impression that the war in the east is well represented. Ok, that still does not account for the things Stalin did internally. The Russians finally have not been an open, democratic and self-critical lot for very long. Plus, I am in no position to judge the output of modern Russian film making.
Click to expand...

http://europeanhistory.about.com/od/dvdandfilmresources/tp/aatpww2dvdef.htm

Here is a selection of films involving the Eastern Front. A couple I have seen. In particular Kanal is a brutal brutal film. And largely historically accurate
 
Canada bans importing 'The Hoax... '

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v06/v06p--4_Weber.html

"The Canadian government has banned the importation of many purely political and historical works, including Behind Communism and None Dare Call It Conspiracy, on the basis of a law which makes it illegal to import literature "of an immoral or indecent character." Bowing to pressure from the B'nai B'rith, Canadian officials added The Hoax of the Twentieth Century to its list of banned books. Canadian police even raided a couple of university libraries to seize copies of this supposedly dangerous book from library shelves. The B'nai B'rith recently asked the Canadian government to forbid the importation of all future issues of The Journal of Historical Review, a particularly pernicious violation of the time-honored principle of the presumption of innocence. Of course, the hypocritical import ban will have no significant long-term effect on the ever wider distribution of revisionist works in Canada. As Arthur Butz put it, the Canadian move against his book was rather like locking the barn door after the horses have already escaped."
 
I believe two copies were seized in Alberta. One was returned; the other had been shredded. It was more a gesture than anything, because we didn't like Zundel stinking up our country. Who would? (IIRC the US had deported him and stuck us with him in the first place.)
 
I Ratant said:
.
I think those laws on Holocaust denial came about through massive guilt in the countries whose governments actively participated in the horrors.
As a penance, for "never again", knowing how unpleasantries can be disregarded if they're politically embarrassing, as those are.
Click to expand...

I always find analogies help, not that holocaust deniers/truthers/whathave you ever acknowledge their validity. But it does show in a logical and direct way how they are wrong.

Think of it this way.

My friends and i every weekend get rip roaring drunk. And every saturday morning we find we got into fistfights, broke windows, and generally did all kinds of crappy harmful things. Though during the week, we are pretty much model citizens.

So we decide one day " hey , we won't drink any more, and in fact if one of us does drink the rest will not condone it in any way shape or form. Because we know when we drink we cause harm. And if we remove drinking from the equation, we will not cause this kind of harm. "

There is nothing wrong with this, and in fact it is the smartest thing to do, remove the thing ( as much as is possible. ) from active use in the group. And this is exactly what those countries in which holocaust denial is " banned" ( you do realize that this extends usually only to public displays, and not , for example simply owning a book. And even when it does, on paper, you would be hard pressed to find anyone arrested for owning a banned book. ) are doing.

When nazi's whine about this, it is just a big smoke screen because their ideology is the whiskey of the world. It makes people want to start fights, and does no real good except entertain the people that like it. And the world has decided en masse not to let something that can and has caused this much damage gain a foothold. When the stakes are as high as genocide, no one is going to let this happen again if they can help it.
 
Mondial said:
The Tragic Death of a Night Porter How Poland Mistreats Holocaust Revisionists http://piotrbein.wordpress.com/2010/07/29/the-tragic-death-of-a-night-porter/
Click to expand...


I looked up this article, although not at the site linked above. The article seems to be making its rounds on the internet. All the hate sites, and lots of others that allow people to post. I actually read it at open.salon.com.

Quick summary: University employee of the history department publishes (self published at 320 copies) a holocaust denial book, gets fired and prosecuted. Ten years later, found dead in a car. Ruled a suicide, which the author doubts.

There's one question I have about this to Mondial.

It refers to the guy (whose name I can't remember, because of the unfamiliar Polish spelling, Dariusz something or another) as one of the country's most promising young historians, prior to the time he suffered a campaign of slander that ruined his life after he touched on a taboo subject.

Do you think that's really true? I don't. What I mean is that I don't think he was a promising historian. He was 37 years old and Wikipedia gives his publication list, and there are only 8 entries. Also, the article didn't call him a "professor". I know that US and Western European systems may not translate to other cultures, but I would expect someone with that promise to have lots of publications and be tenured by that age.

It is my experience in studying fringe history topics that if a source can't get the little details right, they are usually wrong about the "big stuff" too. So, I think that this guy was someone whose career was going nowhere, and who was regarded as, to be charitable, eccentric. He slipped into paranoia and delusion and committed suicide before his 50th birthday, all the while blaming THEM for his downfall. (In his case, THEM was probably the international Jewish conspiracy and their allies in the Polish government.)

But, please, if you have information about this guy beyond the link you posted, do enlighten us. Just keep in mind that on a topic like this, multiple sources are best, because, throught experience, we expect lies from single sources.
 
sadhatter said:
I always find analogies help, not that holocaust deniers/truthers/whathave you ever acknowledge their validity. But it does show in a logical and direct way how they are wrong.

Think of it this way.

My friends and i every weekend get rip roaring drunk. And every saturday morning we find we got into fistfights, broke windows, and generally did all kinds of crappy harmful things. Though during the week, we are pretty much model citizens.

So we decide one day " hey , we won't drink any more, and in fact if one of us does drink the rest will not condone it in any way shape or form. Because we know when we drink we cause harm. And if we remove drinking from the equation, we will not cause this kind of harm. "

There is nothing wrong with this, and in fact it is the smartest thing to do, remove the thing ( as much as is possible. ) from active use in the group. And this is exactly what those countries in which holocaust denial is " banned" ( you do realize that this extends usually only to public displays, and not , for example simply owning a book. And even when it does, on paper, you would be hard pressed to find anyone arrested for owning a banned book. ) are doing.

When nazi's whine about this, it is just a big smoke screen because their ideology is the whiskey of the world. It makes people want to start fights, and does no real good except entertain the people that like it. And the world has decided en masse not to let something that can and has caused this much damage gain a foothold. When the stakes are as high as genocide, no one is going to let this happen again if they can help it.
Click to expand...
.
Yes.
And education, i.e. public acknowledgement of the reality of the Holocaust is the stopper that keeps the filth in the sewer.
 
Saggy said:
Canada bans importing 'The Hoax... '

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v06/v06p--4_Weber.html

"The Canadian government has banned the importation of many purely political and historical works, including Behind Communism and None Dare Call It Conspiracy, on the basis of a law which makes it illegal to import literature "of an immoral or indecent character." Bowing to pressure from the B'nai B'rith, Canadian officials added The Hoax of the Twentieth Century to its list of banned books. Canadian police even raided a couple of university libraries to seize copies of this supposedly dangerous book from library shelves. The B'nai B'rith recently asked the Canadian government to forbid the importation of all future issues of The Journal of Historical Review, a particularly pernicious violation of the time-honored principle of the presumption of innocence. Of course, the hypocritical import ban will have no significant long-term effect on the ever wider distribution of revisionist works in Canada. As Arthur Butz put it, the Canadian move against his book was rather like locking the barn door after the horses have already escaped."
Click to expand...

If you want to read the book, there is this new invention called the internet, and you can find many banned books on it. So how exactly is this having any effect on anyone who wants to read the book?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom