Holocaust denial called "the most vulgar aspect of anti-Semitism"
A BBC news article said,
Here the entire Catholic church is being blamed for the holocaust views of just one Catholic bishop. This shows the tremendous pressure that people are under to conform with holocaust dogma.
My own position is that a "systematic" Jewish holocaust was impossible because the Nazis had no objective and reliable ways of identifying Jews and non-Jews.
Deborah Lipstadt's blog has a number of articles about the controversy.
Pope Benedict XVI has expressed "full and indisputable solidarity" with Jews, distancing himself from a bishop who denies the Nazis used gas chambers.
Briton Richard Williamson was among four bishops whose excommunications were lifted by the Pope last week.
Bishop Williamson said recently: "I believe there were no gas chambers".
Jewish leaders, marking Holocaust Remembrance Day, reacted angrily to the rehabilitation of the bishop, saying it had harmed Catholic-Jewish dialogue. . . . .
Nobel Peace Prize winner and death camp survivor Elie Wiesel said that the Pope, by lifting the excommunication of the British-born cleric, had given credence to "the most vulgar aspect of anti-Semitism".
. . . . On Tuesday, the Chief Rabbinate of Israel -- the supreme Jewish governing body in the country -- broke off official ties with the Vatican in protest over the Pope's decision.
Haifa Chief Rabbi Shear Yishuv Cohen, chairman of the Rabbinate's commission, told The Jerusalem Post that he expected Bishop Williamson to publicly retract his statements before links could be renewed.
Here the entire Catholic church is being blamed for the holocaust views of just one Catholic bishop. This shows the tremendous pressure that people are under to conform with holocaust dogma.
My own position is that a "systematic" Jewish holocaust was impossible because the Nazis had no objective and reliable ways of identifying Jews and non-Jews.
Deborah Lipstadt's blog has a number of articles about the controversy.
Labels: Holocaust revisionism (2 of 2)
posted by Larry Fafarman | 1/31/2009 11:57:00 PM
5 Comments:
I don't have any fixed opinion on the Holocaust. But the enemies of free speech apparently can't get it through their heads that by attempting to legislate against the expression of certain opinions (such as opinions about the Holocaust,) they are making those opinions appear to be more interesting and plausible to many. And in addition, they are themselves taking up an authoritarian or totalitarian position; very similar to the totalitarianism of the Nazis whom they (very properly) abhor.
It's amazing that expressing certain opinions about the Holocaust is illegal in Germany and in some other countries! It seems that the Germans have learned little about the meaning of freedom, of free speech and freedom of thought. Their rejection of free speech makes one wonder how far they have really departed from their bad old days when Hitler, who also rejected free speech, was their leader?
>>>>>> Rejecting something because you can't figure it out is the epitomy of lazyiness and just a bad-human-quality <<<<<<<
I am not "rejecting" -- I am questioning. And I am not "lazy," bozo -- I have done a lot of research on my holocaust revisionism (see two "holocaust revisionism" post labels in the sidebar of the homepage).
>>>>>> . . .here's some common sense, "objective and reliable" is a requirement to kill people?? So, I can't kill anyone that I can't identify as a suitable target? I can't just strat taking shots randomly? <<<<<<
So you agree that the Nazis had no objective and reliable ways of identifying Jews and non-Jews-- the Nazis just randomly killed people?
>>>>>> Or, I can't take a shot based on the suggestion of my neighbor. <<<<<<<
Why should the Nazis trust someone who would rat on a neighbor? And what about all the Jews who were not fingered by their neighbors? Is this an "objective and reliable" way of identifying Jews and non-Jews?
>>>>>> How did Sadam ID the Shia? I would guess that he probably killed a whole bunch of other people just to be sure. Where does 'not systematic' come into play? <<<<<<
Saddam was charged with the mass killing of residents of a particular village -- I don't know the details.
>>>>>>> Do you also refuse to admit that the Nazi government required Jews to self-identify? <<<<<<
So if the US government wants to persecute or exterminate the Jews, all the US government has to do is ask Jews to "self-identify" themselves. Simple. A very "objective and reliable" way of identifying Jews and non-Jews.
The introduction to the book "IBM and the Holocaust" by Edwin Black says,
When Hitler came to power, a central Nazi goal was to identify and destroy Germany's 600,000 Jews. To Nazis, Jews were not just those who practiced Judaism, but those of Jewish blood, regardless of their assimilation, intermarriage, religious activity, or even conversion to Christianity. Only after Jews were identified could they be targeted for asset confiscation, ghettoization, deportation, and ultimately extermination. To search generations of communal, church, and governmental records all across Germany--and later throughout Europe--was a cross-indexing task so monumental, it called for a computer. But in 1933, no computer existed . . . . .
I was haunted by a question whose answer has long eluded historians. The Germans always had the lists of Jewish names. Suddenly, a squadron of grim-faced SS would burst into a city square and post a notice demanding those listed assemble the next day at the train station for deportation to the East. But how did the Nazis get the lists? For decades, no one has known. Few have asked.
The book claims that the Nazis identified all of the Jews of Europe by using primitive IBM Hollerith machines to process data stored on billions of IBM Hollerith cards, but that is absurd. Even if all the necessary data had been available, those primitive machines simply did not have such data-processing capability -- all they could do was just read, sort, and merge a few cards at a time.
>>>>>> You have every right to be a moron, and I have every right to call you out on it. <<<<<<
You are the moron, you stupid sack of #$(%@*.
DEBATING THE HOLOCAUST: A New Look At Both Sides by Thomas Dalton, PhD
Publisher's Note: This is a non-Revisionist title for Theses & Dissertations Press. It will be the first book on the Holocaust, in publishing history, that will not take a Traditionalist or a Revisionist point of view. When you purchase this book, one-third of the proceeds will go to Germar Rudolf and his family.
http://www.amazon.com/Debating-Holocaust-Look-Both-Sides/dp/1591480051/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1233219533&sr=1-1
Founded in 2000 the publishing company Theses & Dissertations Press is at the center of a worldwide network of scholars and activists who are working -- often at great personal sacrifice -- to separate historical fact from propaganda fiction. The founder of Theses & Dissertations Press is Germar Rudolf. Who is currently serving prison time for his published works and will be released on July 4, 2009.
As the new director of Germar Rudolf's American publishing division, I wish to express my outrage that the Holocaust, unlike any other historical event, is not subject to critical revisionist investigation. Furthermore I deplore the fact that many so-called democratic states have laws that criminalize public doubting of the Holocaust. It is my position that the veracity of Holocaust assertions should be determined in the marketplace of scholarly discourse and not in our legislatures bodies and courthouses.
Peace.
Michael Santomauro
Editorial Director
Call: 917-974-6367
ReporterNotebook@Gmail.com
I long accepted the figure of six million Jews killed in the Holocausr. But then I noticed that all of the encyclopedias, etc., that I consulted gave exactly the same figure: six million.
That is astonishing, to say the least. Similar sources give widely different figures for the number who were butchered by Cambodian Marxists under Pol Pot, for instance: anywhere from 300,000 to a million or more.
So it is hard to believe that the six million figure is anything other than a conventional line of some sort. No doubt a great many Jews were killed by the Nazis. But the "official position" merely encourages doubt about what actually happened.
Post a Comment
<< Home