I'm from Missouri

This site is named for the famous statement of US Congressman Willard Duncan Vandiver from Missouri : "I`m from Missouri -- you'll have to show me." This site is dedicated to skepticism of official dogma in all subjects. Just-so stories are not accepted here. This is a site where controversial subjects such as evolution theory and the Holocaust may be freely debated.

Name:
Location: Los Angeles, California, United States

My biggest motivation for creating my own blogs was to avoid the arbitrary censorship practiced by other blogs and various other Internet forums. Censorship will be avoided in my blogs -- there will be no deletion of comments, no closing of comment threads, no holding up of comments for moderation, and no commenter registration hassles. Comments containing nothing but insults and/or ad hominem attacks are discouraged. My non-response to a particular comment should not be interpreted as agreement, approval, or inability to answer.

Thursday, March 15, 2007

Nice Holocaust denial cartoon


From the National Post (Canada) Feb. 16, 2007

=====================================

Talk about double standards! LOL

IMO prison stripes on Zundel and Irving would add to the humor.

I got this one from the website of the Institute for Historical Review.

Labels: ,

22 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

How is this a double standard? I thought a double standard was a rule applied differently within the same system, i.e., one German getting 3 years another nothing, for the same crime. In this cartoon, each person shown doubting the Holocaust is part of a different rule system -- including the person who was not guilty of anything in English (nor would he be in the U.S., for that matter).

Thursday, March 15, 2007 1:49:00 PM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

Anonymous said,

>>>>> How is this a double standard? I thought a double standard was a rule applied differently within the same system, i.e., one German getting 3 years another nothing, for the same crime. In this cartoon, each person shown doubting the Holocaust is part of a different rule system -- including the person who was not guilty of anything in English (nor would he be in the U.S., for that matter). <<<<<

I was talking about a universal double standard, not just a local double standard. By double standard, I meant that there are great differences in the ways different people are treated by different countries for the same actions, though you are correct that this is not the traditional meaning of "double standard."

And I am also talking about a worldwide rule system, not just a local rule system. The condemnation of Iran's president for denying the holocaust has been far greater and more widespread than the condemnation of Germany and Austria for jailing Zundel and Irving. You mentioned England and the USA, where Zundel and Irving would not be jailed for holocaust denial, but the USA in particular has done nothing to officially condemn their jailing whereas the USA has been a leader in the campaign to condemn the Holocaust conference in Iran. That is where the real double standard is.

Thursday, March 15, 2007 3:18:00 PM  
Anonymous Voice in the Wilderness said...

> The condemnation of Iran's president for denying the holocaust has been far greater and more widespread than the condemnation of Germany and Austria for jailing Zundel and Irving. <

Often those protesting bank robbery are not condemned as much for breach of the peace as those robbing the banks.

You have shown that you don't understand the term "double standard". Is there anything that you do understand?

Thursday, March 15, 2007 4:37:00 PM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

VIW wheezes,

>>>>>> Often those protesting bank robbery are not condemned as much for breach of the peace as those robbing the banks.

You have shown that you don't understand the term "double standard". <<<<<<

And you don't understand that holocaust denial or revisionism is not on a par with bank robbery. Freedom of speech is constitutionally protected, but there is no constitutional right to rob banks.

And I have never heard of any public protest of bank robbery.

Germany and Austria -- as well as other countries that have criminalized holocaust revisionism -- are violating one of our most cherished principles, freedom of expression. The USA normally imposes sanctions on countries that violate freedom of expression. There's another double standard right there.

Thursday, March 15, 2007 4:57:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

But Larry, the sanctions on Iran are not because of Holocaust denial; they are because Iran is trying to build nuclear weapon. If any other Holocaust denier tries that, they would be sanctioned or arrested -- try it. I doubt we'll miss you though,

Manuel

Thursday, March 15, 2007 5:39:00 PM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

Anonymous said...

>>>>>> But Larry, the sanctions on Iran are not because of Holocaust denial; they are because Iran is trying to build nuclear weapon. <<<<<<

But Anonymous, I am not talking about sanctions or nuclear weapons. I am talking about a UN resolution -- introduced by the USA -- that condemned holocaust denial. Maybe Iran was not named in the resolution, but the resolution was obviously prompted by the Holocaust conference in Iran.

Thursday, March 15, 2007 7:51:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If you're talking about the UN Resolution in terms of double standard, that makes even less sense that what you've said so far. How does the resolution condemning Iran correspond to the difference between people getting prison terms and one getting elected president? As ViW say's, what do you understand?

You can check the IP address: I'm not he.

Manuel

Friday, March 16, 2007 12:44:00 PM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

Anonymous said...
>>>>> If you're talking about the UN Resolution in terms of double standard, that makes even less sense that what you've said so far. <<<<<<

One of the questions here is whether foreign countries' internal policies regarding holocaust revisionism or denial are or should be any official business of the USA. The USA thinks it is OK to officially condemn Iran for conducting the Holocaust conference but that it is not OK to officially condemn Germany and Austria for jailing holocaust deniers. The USA has even more reason to condemn Germany and Austria because their actions violate our principle of freedom of expression. So there is a double standard there.

>>>>> How does the resolution condemning Iran correspond to the difference between people getting prison terms and one getting elected president? <<<<<<

I already said that "the difference between people getting prison terms and one getting elected president" is not a good example of a double standard because it involves different governments.

>>>>> As ViW say's, what do you understand? <<<<<

ViW understands less than anyone. His comments here mostly just call me wrong and stupid and that sort of thing and say nothing more.

>>>>> You can check the IP address: I'm not he. <<<<<

I am unable to check the IP addresses of commenters here. Also, IP addresses are not reliable means of identification because they are subject to change and because many Internet users may share the same ISP "proxy" IP address. I might be able to check the IP addresses of incoming comments if I used the comment moderation feature, but comment moderation is turned off here.

Friday, March 16, 2007 4:19:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

>>>>>>The USA thinks it is OK to officially condemn Iran for conducting the Holocaust conference but that it is not OK to officially condemn Germany and Austria for jailing holocaust deniers.

But this is a consistent policy: the country that shows signs of supporting Holocaust denial receives an offical but non-binding and essentially meaningless condemnation via the UN while countries that are against Holocaust denialists receive nothing. This actually makes sense. If Austria and Germany supported Holocaust denialists, then the lack of an official rebuke would be hypocritical -- but that's not the case here.

Manuel

Friday, March 16, 2007 5:12:00 PM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

Anonymous said,
>>>>> But this is a consistent policy: the country that shows signs of supporting Holocaust denial receives an offical but non-binding and essentially meaningless condemnation via the UN while countries that are against Holocaust denialists receive nothing. <<<<<<

OK, I will put it this way -- the double standard is where the USA sanctions or condemns countries that deny freedom of expression except where such denial concerns holocaust denial or revisionism. Actually, I already made this point in a previous comment ( March 15, 2007 4:57:00 PM ) --

Germany and Austria -- as well as other countries that have criminalized holocaust revisionism -- are violating one of our most cherished principles, freedom of expression. The USA normally imposes sanctions on countries that violate freedom of expression. There's another double standard right there.

Friday, March 16, 2007 6:05:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

>>>>>>>the double standard is where the USA sanctions or condemns countries that deny freedom of expression except where such denial concerns holocaust denial or revisionism.

What does this have to do with the cartoon again. I don't see a connection.

Manuel

Friday, March 16, 2007 6:12:00 PM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

Anonymous (Manuel) said,
>>>>> What does this have to do with the cartoon again. I don't see a connection. <<<<<

There is no connection. I've already said that my original use of the term "double standard" does not fit the traditional meaning of the term.

Friday, March 16, 2007 6:21:00 PM  
Anonymous Voice in the Wilderness said...

> I've already said that my original use of the term "double standard" does not fit the traditional meaning of the term.<

The dimwit uses a secret code. Words don't mean what they do to the sane.

As an example, when he claims to be winning arguments, he knows he is losing. Censorship means the elimination of posts with which he agrees but not with those he doesn't like but knows to be true. He states "I'm from Missouri" when he has never been in the state other than possibly to change planes in the St. Louis airport.

Sunday, March 18, 2007 9:37:00 AM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

Voice in the Wilderness said...
>>>>>> I've already said that my original use of the term "double standard" does not fit the traditional meaning of the term.<

The dimwit uses a secret code. Words don't mean what they do to the sane. <<<<<<

ViW, unlike you I at least admit it when I am wrong.

Sunday, March 18, 2007 9:23:00 PM  
Anonymous Voice in the Wilderness said...

> ViW, unlike you I at least admit it when I am wrong. <

You are nearly always wrong and it is very rare that you admit. Now if you can point out a place where I have been wrong, I will gladly admit it.

Monday, March 19, 2007 9:25:00 AM  
Anonymous Jim Sherwood said...

That's a pretty funny cartoon, anyway.

Monday, March 19, 2007 4:42:00 PM  
Anonymous Dave Fafarman said...

< He states "I'm from Missouri" when he has never been in the state other than possibly to change planes in the St. Louis airport. >

I think it is likely that Larry has driven across Missouri.

BTW, I have been to the Negro Leagues Baseball Museum, the Harry Truman Museum, Springfield, and Branson -- as well as changing planes in St. Louis. Perhaps I am from Missouri? :-)

Tuesday, March 20, 2007 1:08:00 PM  
Anonymous Jim Sherwood said...

When one looks up "Missouri" in Webster's Third International Dictionary(1993), one finds: "from Missouri: not easily fooled:hard to convince: skeptical."

Since Larry obviously means that dictionary sense of the phrase, one should consider whether he in fact adopts that attitude: not whether or not he has lived in the state of Missouri; etc.

Tuesday, March 20, 2007 6:53:00 PM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

Thanks, Jim. Here is the history given by the Mo. government:

Why Is Missouri Called the "Show-Me" State?

There are a number of stories and legends behind Missouri's sobriquet "Show-Me" state. The slogan is not official, but is common throughout the state and is used on Missouri license plates.

The most widely known legend attributes the phrase to Missouri's U.S. Congressman Willard Duncan Vandiver, who served in the United States House of Representatives from 1897 to 1903. While a member of the U.S. House Committee on Naval Affairs, Vandiver attended an 1899 naval banquet in Philadelphia. In a speech there, he declared, "I come from a state that raises corn and cotton and cockleburs and Democrats, and frothy eloquence neither convinces nor satisfies me. I am from Missouri. You have got to show me." Regardless of whether Vandiver coined the phrase, it is certain that his speech helped to popularize the saying.

Other versions of the "Show-Me" legend place the slogan's origin in the mining town of Leadville, Colorado. There, the phrase was first employed as a term of ridicule and reproach. A miner's strike had been in progress for some time in the mid-1890s, and a number of miners from the lead districts of southwest Missouri had been imported to take the places of the strikers. The Joplin miners were unfamiliar with Colorado mining methods and required frequent instructions. Pit bosses began saying, "That man is from Missouri. You'll have to show him."

However the slogan originated, it has since passed into a different meaning entirely, and is now used to indicate the stalwart, conservative, noncredulous character of Missourians.


I thought "Show-Me State" was the official state nickname -- I saw it in the World Almanac.

Many years ago, I saw a brand of BBQ sauce named "I'm from Missouri" and I didn't know the history behind the term. I thought that it had something to do with Missouri being famous for BBQ, and St. Louis and Kansas City (most of which is in MO) are in fact famous for BBQ.

Tuesday, March 20, 2007 7:50:00 PM  
Anonymous Dave Fafarman said...

< I thought "Show-Me State" was the official state nickname >

Yes, it is. I thought it was even on the Missouri state quarter, but that says "Corps of Discovery" (referring to the Lewis and Clark expedition that started from St. Louis).

Tuesday, March 20, 2007 8:29:00 PM  
Anonymous Dave Fafarman said...

BTW, it's an interesting contrast between the Missouri and California mottoes. California's is "Eureka!" (Greek for "I have found it!"); Missouri's could be construed as "I have not found it!" :-}

Tuesday, March 20, 2007 8:38:00 PM  
Anonymous Voice in the Wilderness said...

> Since Larry obviously means that dictionary sense of the phrase, one should consider whether he in fact adopts that attitude: <

But he does not adopt that attitude. He is easily fooled yet impossible to be convinced by the truth.

P.S. Are you the real Jim Sherwood or that phony from S.F.?

Wednesday, March 21, 2007 5:18:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home