Should Holocaust denial be illegal?
Scroll to see replies
I think it is terrible to make "denying the holocaust" illegal. It, like all other matters of history should be able to stand on the facts and the fact that it
would seem to require draconian laws to silence questioners does not reflect well for it's ability to prevail in the realm of verifiable facts.It is an interesting and ominous topic. People can face prison for saying the WRONG opinion here if their government is not aligned with the protection of Their Free Speech [by God given right]. There are many aspects of interest. One is that if the official [now brand named 'holocaust'] narrative which includes the notion that the German government in WW II conducted an intentional and evidently highly efficient program to 'exterminate' jews & six million
jews were killed in WW II Europe by the Germans. No one quibbles, I assume at using the 6 million number if the actual number is slightly more o
less, although in places where it is illegal to question this matter, best stay silent or consent to 6 million. If these two key elements are not true,
you would still have a substantial number of jews placed in 'concentration', detention and labor camps, along with many others considered as enemies of the wartime Germany. Uk had such camps but not for jews and the USA also had them for American japanese citizens and Germans of various classifications including captured soldiers. Jews since WW II have from wee childhood been told horror tales of how the Nazis murdered six million jews including wee children just because they were jews. This story trumps in horror the other stories which are also included for the creation of a cohesive jewish identity whether secular or religious, including the Russian Porgoms where Russian peasants putatively were crazy mad perioically and attacked and killed [implicitly] innocent jews whenever they, Russian peasants, got mad at their absentt landlords or offficials or whatnot; jews were the innocent scapegoats because they were different wore strange clothes and did not usually speak Russian, and were a helpless peaceful but separate group of people;. and the Spanish Inquisition. So if the extermination in gas chamber of millions of jews by the German government were not really true but was perhaps a revenge fest of the victors, then a grave injustice has been done to Germans and still so including telling them this is what they did and though possibly no Germans from that time exist, Germans are probebaly still paying 'reparations' of billions of dollars, 60-odd billion was the number I saw a few years ago. So it could get messy if the truth were to be found to be contrary to the Official
Truth. However, for lovers of truth, who can control their articulations if they reside in a place where punishment looms for thinking and saying something suggesting doubt of the accuracy of the official truth. There is a place online maintained by Yale University that has all the records from the Nuremberg Tribunal. It is called, I believe, the Avalon Project. On page one of the website there is a link to the Nuremberg Code [I think that is what it is called] which outlines the rules that were to and did govern the Nuremberg Tribune. i think it is number 19 or thereabouts that indicates that the rules of evidence utilized in the USA and UK were not to be in effect. That was significant as things played out. There are two free online video documentaries which cover much of the official narrative by examine the facts, verifiable facts and forensic evidence that is available and whether it supports the official story. You be the judge for yourself ultimately but a exposure to the evidence may bolster your confidence in whatever assessment you make, and whether to change or adjust your view with the evidence you find over time. these two videos are a good basic explanation of the facts and evidence without emotional appeal, subterfuge, manipulation etc. First is "The Truth behind The Gates of Auschwitz" which should include an interview with the administrator of Auschwitz at the time David Cole, the creator and narrator of the film was made. David is jewish and wears a skull cap. That video is about an hour or a bit more . The second video documentary is four hours and fifteen minutes and works well as just audio if need be. It was made by someone anonymously using the name Denier Bud. He has since made himself public but I forget his name. They both are marvelous as they stay focused on the facts, and logical evaluations. This film is called 'One Third Of The Holocaust". The narrator explains that Cole's excellent video addresses about one third of the Holocaust story crimes of the nazis, and his video addresses the other two thirds also from the vantage of examination of the facts and evidence. There are WW II crimes not addressed in the official history we get.
These include the phosphorous fire bombing of all German cities, civilian targets, with more that a 50,ooo population; and the killing of Germans in the immediate postwar period including the Eisenhower camps where German soldiers who had surrendered at the end of the war were starved to death intentionally in Eisenhower camps, and this involved changing their classification that allowed blocking RedCross access to the captive
Germans. something . And some other events like Operation Keelhaul. By the way, the International Red Cross did have periodic access to the
German concentration -forced labor-camps and kept records. Unfortunately they were somehow silenced for some years and then it would be and
i guess may be now illegal to provide their data to the public. But it was provided some years ago before the long silence. And that info is findable and may now be available on the IRC website now that they have shared their extensive docs with several locations including the holocaust museum in Washington D.C .Opening the door to allow the bifurcation of history into Officially true history vs. factually true history is a bad idea and once accepted there is no reason why the powers that be may not augment this liberty to make history be what they wish and to jail or Off with your head if you express doubt. In the USSR from when the Bolsheviks were given control in 1917, "anti-Semitism" [one of those terms like
holocaust-denial] was made a capital crime, i.e. punishable by Death;- and to identify any public official as a jew was specifically taboo. Oddly enough, most were jews at least initially, because the USSR was a jewish utopian project. This fairly recent also free documentary findable online, [archive.org has many things not found elsewhere] and may have it's own website and be on youtube, is "HELLSTORM" and based on a book of the same name; it addresses the years at the end of, and post- WWII for the Germans. It was created by Kyle Hunt of renegadebroadcasting.com.
An internet radio host, Deanna Spingola, has done a number of interviews with the author, historian, who wrote the Hellstorm book, but whose name eludes me but is findable online. Spingola's radio archives are freely available; or just search for the author's name and spingola and such interviews may show up. It is part of the big picture.
would seem to require draconian laws to silence questioners does not reflect well for it's ability to prevail in the realm of verifiable facts.It is an interesting and ominous topic. People can face prison for saying the WRONG opinion here if their government is not aligned with the protection of Their Free Speech [by God given right]. There are many aspects of interest. One is that if the official [now brand named 'holocaust'] narrative which includes the notion that the German government in WW II conducted an intentional and evidently highly efficient program to 'exterminate' jews & six million
jews were killed in WW II Europe by the Germans. No one quibbles, I assume at using the 6 million number if the actual number is slightly more o
less, although in places where it is illegal to question this matter, best stay silent or consent to 6 million. If these two key elements are not true,
you would still have a substantial number of jews placed in 'concentration', detention and labor camps, along with many others considered as enemies of the wartime Germany. Uk had such camps but not for jews and the USA also had them for American japanese citizens and Germans of various classifications including captured soldiers. Jews since WW II have from wee childhood been told horror tales of how the Nazis murdered six million jews including wee children just because they were jews. This story trumps in horror the other stories which are also included for the creation of a cohesive jewish identity whether secular or religious, including the Russian Porgoms where Russian peasants putatively were crazy mad perioically and attacked and killed [implicitly] innocent jews whenever they, Russian peasants, got mad at their absentt landlords or offficials or whatnot; jews were the innocent scapegoats because they were different wore strange clothes and did not usually speak Russian, and were a helpless peaceful but separate group of people;. and the Spanish Inquisition. So if the extermination in gas chamber of millions of jews by the German government were not really true but was perhaps a revenge fest of the victors, then a grave injustice has been done to Germans and still so including telling them this is what they did and though possibly no Germans from that time exist, Germans are probebaly still paying 'reparations' of billions of dollars, 60-odd billion was the number I saw a few years ago. So it could get messy if the truth were to be found to be contrary to the Official
Truth. However, for lovers of truth, who can control their articulations if they reside in a place where punishment looms for thinking and saying something suggesting doubt of the accuracy of the official truth. There is a place online maintained by Yale University that has all the records from the Nuremberg Tribunal. It is called, I believe, the Avalon Project. On page one of the website there is a link to the Nuremberg Code [I think that is what it is called] which outlines the rules that were to and did govern the Nuremberg Tribune. i think it is number 19 or thereabouts that indicates that the rules of evidence utilized in the USA and UK were not to be in effect. That was significant as things played out. There are two free online video documentaries which cover much of the official narrative by examine the facts, verifiable facts and forensic evidence that is available and whether it supports the official story. You be the judge for yourself ultimately but a exposure to the evidence may bolster your confidence in whatever assessment you make, and whether to change or adjust your view with the evidence you find over time. these two videos are a good basic explanation of the facts and evidence without emotional appeal, subterfuge, manipulation etc. First is "The Truth behind The Gates of Auschwitz" which should include an interview with the administrator of Auschwitz at the time David Cole, the creator and narrator of the film was made. David is jewish and wears a skull cap. That video is about an hour or a bit more . The second video documentary is four hours and fifteen minutes and works well as just audio if need be. It was made by someone anonymously using the name Denier Bud. He has since made himself public but I forget his name. They both are marvelous as they stay focused on the facts, and logical evaluations. This film is called 'One Third Of The Holocaust". The narrator explains that Cole's excellent video addresses about one third of the Holocaust story crimes of the nazis, and his video addresses the other two thirds also from the vantage of examination of the facts and evidence. There are WW II crimes not addressed in the official history we get.
These include the phosphorous fire bombing of all German cities, civilian targets, with more that a 50,ooo population; and the killing of Germans in the immediate postwar period including the Eisenhower camps where German soldiers who had surrendered at the end of the war were starved to death intentionally in Eisenhower camps, and this involved changing their classification that allowed blocking RedCross access to the captive
Germans. something . And some other events like Operation Keelhaul. By the way, the International Red Cross did have periodic access to the
German concentration -forced labor-camps and kept records. Unfortunately they were somehow silenced for some years and then it would be and
i guess may be now illegal to provide their data to the public. But it was provided some years ago before the long silence. And that info is findable and may now be available on the IRC website now that they have shared their extensive docs with several locations including the holocaust museum in Washington D.C .Opening the door to allow the bifurcation of history into Officially true history vs. factually true history is a bad idea and once accepted there is no reason why the powers that be may not augment this liberty to make history be what they wish and to jail or Off with your head if you express doubt. In the USSR from when the Bolsheviks were given control in 1917, "anti-Semitism" [one of those terms like
holocaust-denial] was made a capital crime, i.e. punishable by Death;- and to identify any public official as a jew was specifically taboo. Oddly enough, most were jews at least initially, because the USSR was a jewish utopian project. This fairly recent also free documentary findable online, [archive.org has many things not found elsewhere] and may have it's own website and be on youtube, is "HELLSTORM" and based on a book of the same name; it addresses the years at the end of, and post- WWII for the Germans. It was created by Kyle Hunt of renegadebroadcasting.com.
An internet radio host, Deanna Spingola, has done a number of interviews with the author, historian, who wrote the Hellstorm book, but whose name eludes me but is findable online. Spingola's radio archives are freely available; or just search for the author's name and spingola and such interviews may show up. It is part of the big picture.
Original post by Brendan2
and i prefer to watch video's or listen to audio.
See my post a few comments below yours Brandan2 26 Dec. 2016 as it mentions a few relevant fact focused videos by name and worth seeing and one works well as audio.
and i prefer to watch video's or listen to audio. See my post a few comments below yours Brandan2 26 Dec. 2016 as it mentions a few relevant fact focused videos by name and worth seeing and one works well as audio.
I think that's because you find it difficult to read serious history books.
Original post by JavaScriptMaster
It means no one talks about it anymore cuz it's old news... Anyone who was even involved with the Holocaust is now either dead or on their last legs like the gal in your avatar. There's new things going on in this world u know, Kimbo Slice and Muhammad Ali died this week. Why not talk about that?
This is incredibly narrow minded. The holocaust shows many deep piece of information into how a person responds when they have denial of responsibility as well as limitless power.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Yes, but I have no problem with those that advocate HOLOHOAX denial being subject to ridicule.
Original post by Fenice
I am not entirely comfortable with the idea that an area of history should be off limits to historical enquiry, and that people who disagree with the established version of events should be fined and barred from certain countries
The phrase 'they wouldn't have had it any other way' comes to mind
The phrase 'they wouldn't have had it any other way' comes to mind
The fact that it is illegal makes the issue highly suspect. The word 'gagging' comes to mind.
Original post by mjk123
The fact that it is illegal
It isn't illegal in the UK.
Original post by mjk123
The fact that it is illegal makes the issue highly suspect. The word 'gagging' comes to mind.
This can make this particular event suspect only for those who lack the most substantial knowledge about it, and therefore should not speak a work about it.
Original post by Fenice
I am not entirely comfortable with the idea that an area of history should be off limits to historical enquiry, and that people who disagree with the established version of events should be fined and barred from certain countries
The phrase 'they wouldn't have had it any other way' comes to mind
The phrase 'they wouldn't have had it any other way' comes to mind
It is illegal because the NWO doesn't want the truth about the gas chambers to come out.
Original post by Chaz254
It is one of the only things that you cannot talk about or question. Free speech goes out the window for this one thing.
Holocaust denial is legal in the UK. Of course, if you espouse it people will think you're a crazy maniac and not take you seriously, but that's no more a restriction on "free speech" than taking the same attitude to flat-earthers and 9/11 Truthers.
People can deny what they want, it doesn't mean they'll be respected for it, but it's a human right to be able to think/talk freely.
Original post by Chaz254
Absolutely, but it is illegal in Germany and people get put in prison for it.
That's really stupid and ironic considering denying people's rights is something Hitler would do/has done.
Absolutely not!
I am not a holocaust denier by any stretch, but everyone is entitled to their opinion and the right to investigation and curiosity.
Banning anything like this is heading into 'thought police' territory, which terrifies me far more than any holocaust denier ever could!
I am not a holocaust denier by any stretch, but everyone is entitled to their opinion and the right to investigation and curiosity.
Banning anything like this is heading into 'thought police' territory, which terrifies me far more than any holocaust denier ever could!
Of course not. Do you think you are going to stop deniers holding such views by not talking with them. Bad ideas and lies wither in the full sunlight of debate.
What's next?
Making it illegal to criticize Islam, feminism, etc
What's next?
Making it illegal to criticize Islam, feminism, etc
Original post by Just my opinion
Of course not. Do you think you are going to stop deniers holding such views by not talking with them. Bad ideas and lies wither in the full sunlight of debate.
What's next?
Making it illegal to criticize Islam, feminism, etc
What's next?
Making it illegal to criticize Islam, feminism, etc
I don't think it's about stopping them thinking it, but stopping that opinion from being heard in a public space, such as with racism.
).While on one hand the Holocaust is a proven fact, making it legal to tell people what to believe is a dangerous precedent to set. No, I don't think Holocaust denial should be illegal, but hate speech should be.
Original post by petalsunrise
I don't think it's about stopping them thinking it, but stopping that opinion from being heard in a public space, such as with racism.
Freedom Of Speech without an audience is simply the freedom to speak.
If you believe peoples opinions can be swayed so easily by ideas with no merit, such as racism, etc, don't you also have to think people can just as easily see that an idea has no merit? How are they to decide if they're never exposed to such nonsense? Do you feel only the educated elite are capable of rejecting an idea with no merit? To accept or reject an idea people have to hear both sides of an issue. If you truly believe an issue is based on hatred alone it is your responsibility to counter the speakers of such ideas in a public forum using language the listener understands; not in the language of an elite class because it won't be heard.
Sorry if this sounds a bit awkward but to answer the question; in my opinion unless speech is putting someone in immediate danger, it should not be banned. No good can come of it.
(edited 6 years ago)
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- French holocaust denier faces extradition from Scotland
- What is the best way to study/revise History?🤔
- Debate Help!!!
- Is TSR a hotbed of conservative right conspiracy theorists?
- Why is insider trading illegal
- History A-level NEA OCR Structure/Tips
- Epq ideas
- Is Israel winning
- 2023 King's Speech
- A Level History NEA Helo
- Book Analysis
- Can immigration actually been controlled?
- De-banked for expressing alternative social views
- Where can I find cash-in-hand jobs?
- Five Stages of an A Level Biologist
- Should a 13 year old date a 16 year old?
- Is it normal for a man to dislike pornography?
- Is downloading anime legal?
- Waitress job dodgy?
- Computer virus
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
