Merged General Holocaust denial discussion thread

[Nick Terry]

Nick, you can't bet that dumb. There is legislation in every European country that bans any discussion of the holohoax that exposes it.

Every European country is a flat-out lie. It'd be nice to say that you know it's a flat out lie, but unfortunately it seems that you're actually too thick to realise that you just stepped on your crank, yet again.

Maybe you should ask yourself why only one 'historical event' is protected by law from critical examination.

In the US? In Britain? In Russia? In Denmark? In Italy? In Spain? In Sweden? In Japan? In China? Protected in all those places, right?

Then you can link to the relevant laws, can't you? Hop to it.

When you figure out the answer you'll understand the holohoax.

Seeing as how you evidently don't know the answer to your own 'question', I guess we can all agree that the only one who doesn't understand anything, is you. Again.

 

[Nick Terry]

I've a question, not just for Saggy but for all the 'revisionist' posters on this thread.

Exactly how does it help your cause if you guys endlessly repeat obvious lies or make hyperbolic claims which are clearly nonsense? How does it help you guys for Saggy to say this:

Maybe you should ask yourself why only one 'historical event' is protected by law from critical examination.

It's doubly wrong because (a) the overwhelming majority of countries worldwide, starting with the US and UK, don't have any such laws, and (b) there are laws against genocide denial in general, as well as the denial of communist mass murders on the statute books of a number of European states.

This is not rocket science, folks. The laws are spelled out pretty clearly in Wikipedia and elsewhere. It doesn't take long to check the facts. So if you ignore the facts and make up this kind of horsehockey, it makes you look really, really stupid or really, really dishonest.

And we've been over this a good half dozen times in this thread. It comes back up again, gets refuted, then a week or two later, another idiot reposts the same crap.

Don't you guys have the slightest bit of self-awareness? Do you not realise how you are coming over to the lurkers?

 

[MG1962]

Maybe you should ask yourself why only one 'historical event' is protected by law from critical examination. When you figure out the answer you'll understand the holohoax.

It's not and stop trying to represent the legislation as something it is not

 

[TSR]

Nick, you can't bet that dumb. There is legislation in every European country that bans any discussion of the holohoax that exposes it.

.
You mean dumb enough to claim that your own link shows that Florida kindergarten -> third grade are taught about the Holocaust when it very specifically does not?

Or dumb enough not to notice that you've moved the goalpost ("that exposes it") and you are *still* wrong: most European countries do *not* have such legislation, nor would such "exposure" be criminal in most of those that do have related laws -- however, lies such as "Florida kindergarteners have the Holocaust shoved down their throat", "There was a childrens' zoo at Treblinka", and "The gas chamber at Dachau was only a fully functional shower room" would be criminal in those countries, as those are all degenerate lies posted by you -- not to "discuss", not to "expose" but to deny for ideological reasons having nothing to do with the facts of the matter.
.

 

[Saggy]

Exactly how does it help your cause if you guys endlessly repeat obvious lies or make hyperbolic claims which are clearly nonsense? How does it help you guys for Saggy to say this:

Here is the fact, the holohoax is the only historical non-event that is protected by law in the west. While there are no laws explicitly prohibiting holocaust denial in the US it is kept totally out of the media and any attempt to broach the subject even in an academic setting, as witness Bradley Smith's efforts, results in vilification and banning, even from campus newspapers.

And, the US will actively act to deport any foreigner that effectively questions the holohoax, witness Ernst Zundel, and the two English chaps who are now in prison in England for denying the hoax. Zundel was deported from the US to Canada where he was prosecuted by denying the hoax.

You think that because you can deny the holohoax in Sweden legally you proved some sort of point. Pure idiocy. Does anyone in Sweden actually deny the hoax? Can I place an ad in a Swedish newspaper denying the hoax?

Moreover, the Zionists have been working for 30 years trying to make hoax denial illegal in the US. The ADL boasts of its thirty years of efforts and moans about the difficulties it faces because of the First Amendment to the Constitution, the only thing that has thwarted them, here ...

http://www.adl.org/internet/print.asp

online hate speech remains protected under the First Amendment. Hate speech and the many varied forums available on the Internet for the exchange of information have opened up a new set of legal quandaries. Many of the thorniest issues surrounding hate speech ultimately will be decided in the courts.

and here ...

http://www.adl.org/99hatecrime/print.asp

Fighting words are words which will provoke the person to whom they are directed to violence; more than 50 years ago, in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire,6
6 315 U.S. 568 (1942). In Chaplinsky, the defendant had been convicted of issuing an insult after calling a city marshall a "racketeer" and a "damned fascist." The doctrine of "fighting words," elaborated in this one case, has not played a significant role in recent free speech jurisprudence. Use of the doctrine in R.A.V. gave every appearance of a last-ditch effort to salvage a problematic ordinance.
the Supreme Court decided that such words were not protected by the First Amendment.

Here the Zionist gambit is to criminalize 'fighting words'. They are trying every angle possible to criminalize speech in the US.

 

[Saggy]

The situation in Europe ....

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/19/world/europe/19iht-eu.4.5359640.html

BRUSSELS — The European Union approved legislation Thursday that would make denying the Holocaust punishable by jail sentences, but would also give countries across the 27-member bloc the option of not enforcing the law if such a prohibition did not exist in their own laws.

So, it is apparently against the law to deny the holohoax anywhere in the EU, but the crime may go unpunished

The holohoax is the only historical lie that is protected by explicit laws against questioning it.

 

[MG1962]

The situation in Europe ....

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/19/world/europe/19iht-eu.4.5359640.html

BRUSSELS — The European Union approved legislation Thursday that would make denying the Holocaust punishable by jail sentences, but would also give countries across the 27-member bloc the option of not enforcing the law if such a prohibition did not exist in their own laws.

So, it is apparently against the law to deny the holohoax anywhere in the EU, but the crime may go unpunished

The holohoax is the only historical lie that is protected by explicit laws against questioning it.

As usual your lies catch up with you. From your own article.....

The legislation calls for jail terms of as much as three years for "intentional conduct" that incites violence or hatred against a person's "race, color, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin." The same punishment would apply to those who incite violence by "denying or grossly trivializing crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes."

 

[Dogzilla]

Nick, you can't bet that dumb. There is legislation in every European country that bans any discussion of the holohoax that exposes it.

Maybe you should ask yourself why only one 'historical event' is protected by law from critical examination. When you figure out the answer you'll understand the holohoax.

EVERY European country is a bit of an exaggeration. I haven't done the math but I don't think even MOST European countries protect the holocaust from critical examination. But since Germany, Austria, France, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland do, anybody wanting to investigate the most important sites of the holocaust or who wants to study the records in the archives of the countries where the holocaust took place is unable to conduct any research if their research questions the official history.

But to answer Nick's question about censorship, you could easily ban promoting the official history as easily as you ban questioning the official history. Merely declare Germans a "protected class" and call the holocaust "anti-German hate speech" (which it is). Current laws against promoting racial intolerance, inciting ethnic violence, and talking trash about dead people would effectively stop anybody from talking about the holocaust. It's not censorship when you make hate speech illegal. It's called promoting tolerance. Unless, of course, there's some sort of double standard at play.

 

[Wroclaw]

Wasn't Bernard Lewis fined many years ago in France for denying the Armenian genocide?

 

[TSR]

Merely declare Germans a "protected class" and call the holocaust "anti-German hate speech" (which it is).

.
... and ignore the simple fact that "Nazi" != "German".
.

Unless, of course, there's some sort of double standard at play.

.
Or unless someone with an agenda to push tries to equate being German in general and being a Nazi specifically.

Hmmm, who do we know that might do that?


You *might* just want to consider not trying the "double standard" thing ever again, since you've failed so miserably and publicly at understanding that differences in the situations you are trying to compare make those comparisons you try to make laughable every single time in this thread you have attempted to demonstrate a double standard.

If the cat has kittens in the oven, it does not reflect a double standard to point out that they are not scones. Nor does calling them pumpkin pie change either their feline nature, nor the fact that pumpkins do not tend to purr when you gently rub their tummies.
.

 

[Robrob]

That was then. This is now. Review the FL manuals for teaching the hoax in ALL GRADES starting with KINDERGARTEN, here .....

http://www.hdec.org/resource_manual.htm

Wow, do you even read these things before you post or are you simply parroting others?

It's not "mandatory" in the least and in the very first paragraph proves you UN-truthful.

Grades K - 3

This resource manual, developed for students in grades Kindergarten through Grade Three, uses children's literature to develop key concepts within the realm of character education and will build a foundation for Holocaust education in the upper grades. Because of the nature of Holocaust studies, the Holocaust itself is not to be taught in Grades K-3. Students are given the opportunity to view the actions and motivations of fictional characters and through the literature explore their own feelings and attitudes.

 

[Nick Terry]

Wasn't Bernard Lewis fined many years ago in France for denying the Armenian genocide?

Yes.

 

[Nick Terry]

EVERY European country is a bit of an exaggeration. I haven't done the math but I don't think even MOST European countries protect the holocaust from critical examination. But since Germany, Austria, France, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland do, anybody wanting to investigate the most important sites of the holocaust or who wants to study the records in the archives of the countries where the holocaust took place is unable to conduct any research if their research questions the official history.

Ah, the usual crybaby excuse about research. It might have more weight were there more than 3 people on the entire revisionist scene who have even tried to do anything like proper research (eg in libraries). Otherwise it's just another pathetic excuse.

But to answer Nick's question about censorship, you could easily ban promoting the official history as easily as you ban questioning the official history. Merely declare Germans a "protected class" and call the holocaust "anti-German hate speech" (which it is). Current laws against promoting racial intolerance, inciting ethnic violence, and talking trash about dead people would effectively stop anybody from talking about the holocaust. It's not censorship when you make hate speech illegal. It's called promoting tolerance. Unless, of course, there's some sort of double standard at play.

So, let me get this straight. You propose banning discussion of the Holocaust by artists etc in the United States, where there isn't a hate speech law anyhow. And enforcing a similar law across the rest of the globe, where there aren't anti-denial laws.

 

[Nick Terry]

Here is the fact, the holohoax is the only historical non-event that is protected by law in the west. While there are no laws explicitly prohibiting holocaust denial in the US it is kept totally out of the media and any attempt to broach the subject even in an academic setting, as witness Bradley Smith's efforts, results in vilification and banning, even from campus newspapers.

And, the US will actively act to deport any foreigner that effectively questions the holohoax, witness Ernst Zundel, and the two English chaps who are now in prison in England for denying the hoax. Zundel was deported from the US to Canada where he was prosecuted by denying the hoax.

You think that because you can deny the holohoax in Sweden legally you proved some sort of point. Pure idiocy. Does anyone in Sweden actually deny the hoax? Can I place an ad in a Swedish newspaper denying the hoax?

Moreover, the Zionists have been working for 30 years trying to make hoax denial illegal in the US. The ADL boasts of its thirty years of efforts and moans about the difficulties it faces because of the First Amendment to the Constitution, the only thing that has thwarted them, here ...

http://www.adl.org/internet/print.asp

online hate speech remains protected under the First Amendment. Hate speech and the many varied forums available on the Internet for the exchange of information have opened up a new set of legal quandaries. Many of the thorniest issues surrounding hate speech ultimately will be decided in the courts.

and here ...

http://www.adl.org/99hatecrime/print.asp

Fighting words are words which will provoke the person to whom they are directed to violence; more than 50 years ago, in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire,6
6 315 U.S. 568 (1942). In Chaplinsky, the defendant had been convicted of issuing an insult after calling a city marshall a "racketeer" and a "damned fascist." The doctrine of "fighting words," elaborated in this one case, has not played a significant role in recent free speech jurisprudence. Use of the doctrine in R.A.V. gave every appearance of a last-ditch effort to salvage a problematic ordinance.
the Supreme Court decided that such words were not protected by the First Amendment.

Here the Zionist gambit is to criminalize 'fighting words'. They are trying every angle possible to criminalize speech in the US.

I'm sorry, Saggy, but repeating a lie doesn't make it true. Holocaust denial isn't criminal in the majority of countries in the west, and there are laws criminalising the denial of other genocides and communist crimes.

 

[Nick Terry]

The situation in Europe ....

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/19/world/europe/19iht-eu.4.5359640.html

BRUSSELS — The European Union approved legislation Thursday that would make denying the Holocaust punishable by jail sentences, but would also give countries across the 27-member bloc the option of not enforcing the law if such a prohibition did not exist in their own laws.

So, it is apparently against the law to deny the holohoax anywhere in the EU, but the crime may go unpunished

The holohoax is the only historical lie that is protected by explicit laws against questioning it.

and once again, repeating a lie doesn't make it true. It also doesn't help to quote a newspaper article which undermines your argument.

 

[Saggy]

Wow, do you even read these things before you post or are you simply parroting others?

It's not "mandatory" in the least and in the very first paragraph proves you UN-truthful.

Grades K - 3

The K-3 manual is for softening them up, getting them ready for the explicit hoax programming to begin in grade 4. It is truly a degenerate book, sick ... here is a sample question .... "What does prejudice smell like?". This book should be burned.

The phony goal is to teach the students 'tolerance'. The absurdity of having the Zionists, for 3000 years the most intolerant people on the planet, hating everyone and being hated in return, teach children 'tolerance' is truly sickening.

This is from a review of Israel Shahak's 'Three Thousand Years of Jewish History', must reading incidentally ....

When the Roman historian Tacitus pointed out 19 centuries ago that the Jews are unique among the races of man in their intense hatred and contempt for all races but their own, he was only repeating what many other scholars had discovered before him. For the next 1,900 years other investigators came to similar conclusions, either from a study of the Jews' religious writings or from a study of the Jews' behavior toward non-Jews.

 

[Saggy]

and once again, repeating a lie doesn't make it true. It also doesn't help to quote a newspaper article which undermines your argument.

I didn't repeat it ace, I cited a NYT article stating it.

 

[MG1962]

I didn't repeat it ace, I cited a NYT article stating it.

And I quoted from the same article proving you wrong

 

[Wroclaw]

The absurdity of having the Zionists, for 3000 years the most intolerant people on the planet, hating everyone and being hated in return, teach children 'tolerance' is truly sickening.

What better proof is needed that Saggy really means Jews?

 

[Wroclaw]

From the same article:

The scope of the law also does not cover other historical events, like the massacre of Armenians during the First World War by Ottoman Turks, which Armenians call a genocide. Instead, the legislation recognized only genocides that fall under the statutes of the International Criminal Court in The Hague, like the mass killing of Jews during World War II and the massacre in Rwanda in 1994.

So much for that "only historical event" crap, eh Saggy? You don't, like, read real good, do you?