It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Austria Holds 'Holocaust Denier'

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 04:06 PM
link   
Djarums,
What you say is valid except for one point David Irving is an Englishman born in Essex, England in 1938.
So he does enjoy freedom of speech as per the laws of England.
edited to add link to Bio
www.ihr.org...

[edit on 17-11-2005 by kenshiro2012]




posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 04:15 PM
link   
Djarums, you need to learn how the European Union works.

Just because their is a law in Austria doesn't mean that the European Court of Justice won't over-rule it, especailly since this law was about prior to them joining the E.U. in 1995.



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 04:35 PM
link   
To Odium:


as posted by Odium
I find it amusing that ‘Denying the Holocaust’ is an offence. He has never directly claimed that it didn’t happen and that people were not worked to death in Concentration Camps or deliberately killed in Extermination Camps but rather the level of proof that we have and how we evaluate it. Which is something many people have questioned - however to publicly do such a thing ruins their career. I wonder how many War Veterans like to know this happens? Especially after Austria was ‘Liberated’ from a regime who ‘punished’ people for holding an individual view on things.


Excuse me there Odium, but here is a definition of "holocaust denier":


Holocaust denial refers to the claims of a small group of amateur and academic historians who argue that the Holocaust, as known to history, is either highly exaggerated or otherwise completely falsified. Such claims have led a number of experts, historians, and even first-hand witnesses to forcefully debunk them and their authors. Holocaust denial is illegal in a number of European countries.

define:holocaust denier

As such, Mr. David Irving is a "holocaust denier", period.
Furthermore, your are mistaken on your word usage of "many people".
They are a minority in the academic field of research centering on the study of the Holocaust.



And to kenshiro2012, the Institute of Historical Review is not an academically recognized historical institution or journal. They are a "holocaust deniers" site, which is set up by those minority amatuer and academic historians.





seekerof

[edit on 17-11-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 04:46 PM
link   
seekerof



And to kenshiro2012, the Institute of Historical Review is not an academically recognized historical institution or journal. They are a "holocaust deniers" site, which is set up by those minority amatuer and academic historians.


I did not put forth that IRH was anyway a historical institution. I used them solely as a source to show that David Irving was NOT an Austrian but an English man. If you really wish, I will find another source to demonstrate this. The reason that I was demonstrating that Irving was an englishman was Djarums put forth the idea that he was not covered by freedom of speech of England, but the laws of Austria.



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Understood, kenshiro2012.

I just felt it was necessary to mention what I did being that I work as a history research assistant to a Department of History Head Professor. Having to do alot of research myself, IHR is known for what it is in the academic community [at least in the US, I cannot speak for overseas academic institutions]. Most to all material released/published by IHR is met with a great deal of skepticism by the academic community. Most campus' that have online access for researching academic or professional journals and the such do not electronically recognize them, thus most of their material is screened out or prevented from being utilized in academic research.

There is a credible academic field for researching and revising historical mistakes and errors, but IHR and the like are not included among those that do such corrections.





seekerof

[edit on 17-11-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Many
Amounting to or consisting of a large indefinite number: many friends.



Indefinite Number
A variable number.


To me Seekerof, it is fine to use the term "Many People" because it is a large indefinite number of people. If only 1% of the population believes that the official story that is still a large group of people, however small when compaired to society as a whole. However the term is highly subjective and left to what a person sees as large or many.


Google
Holocaust denial refers to the claims of a small group of amateur and academic historians who argue that the Holocaust, as known to history, is either highly exaggerated or otherwise completely falsified. Such claims have led a number of experts, historians, and even first-hand witnesses to forcefully debunk them and their authors. Holocaust denial is illegal in a number of European countries.



Wikipedia
Holocaust denial refers to the claims of a small number of individuals and groups, who argue that the Holocaust did not occur as it is defined by mainstream historiography. Key elements of Holocaust denial are the explicit or implicit denial that, in the Holocaust:
  • The Nazi government had a policy of deliberately targeting the Jews for extermination as a people;
  • Around 6 million Jews (and millions of non-Jews) were systematically killed by the Nazis and their allies; and
  • Among other methods, gas chambers were used in extermination camps to kill Jews.In addition, most Holocaust denial implies, or openly states, that the current mainstream understanding of the Holocaust is the result of a deliberate Jewish conspiracy. For this reason, Holocaust denial can be considered an antisemitic conspiracy theory. Because of this, Holocaust denial is also illegal in a number of European countries, as it is considered to be motivated by, and promoting, an antisemitic and anti-democratic agenda.


  • The Google link you use is from a much older Wikipedia Article which got taken down as it was 'attacking' the "denial" arguement and was deemed to be biased.

    Is there a problem with bringing into open debate how many people were killed? What if it is more and not less? Shouldn't we know? I really do not see the harm in discussing the Holocaust. If I am able to and have had millions of my relatives killed [not just by Nazi Germany] I do not see why Jewish people, Slavs, et al can't. In fact if we could solve it and work towards why it happened and create a better understanding of the issues it would be better for us all around.



    posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 05:15 PM
    link   
    Odium:


    Is there a problem with bringing into open debate how many people were killed? What if it is more and not less? Shouldn't we know? I really do not see the harm in discussing the Holocaust. If I am able to and have had millions of my relatives killed [not just by Nazi Germany] I do not see why Jewish people, Slavs, et al can't. In fact if we could solve it and work towards why it happened and create a better understanding of the issues it would be better for us all around.


    Is it a problem? Is there a problem? Depends on the motive, Odium, does it not?
    How extensively researched has the Holocaust already been done?
    Considering how extensively it has already been researched, including the numbers of people murdered, it would seem to me to boil down to motive, especially in taking into respect what I have mentioned on how extensively researched the Holocaust has already been done, Odium.

    Let me ask you:
    Why is it that the Holocaust is the genocide that your subjectively implied and applied "many people" seem to want to delve in? Ask yourself that objectively, k? Cause I do not see many of those implied and applied "many people" researching or trying to debunk the number of people that were murdered by Stalin--in excess of 13-20 million--furthermore, I do not see "many people" researching or trying to debunk those numbers for the Armenian genocide or any other genocide that has occurred.

    Again, why just the Holocaust thats in question?
    Again, that is a problem to me, it is simple motive, Odium.





    seekerof

    [edit on 17-11-2005 by Seekerof]



    posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 05:27 PM
    link   
    Seekerof, of cause the Nazi Holocaust is going to gain more attention. It is something which took part during a time which shaped the World as we know it right now. In the United Kingdom they do not even teach about any of those subjects, in fact until the last years of a degree you do not learn about what the Japanese did unless a teacher decides to put it in - however you are never tested on it.

    This is a problem with the education system and one which will cause a lot more hatred. In some respects I am sick how the Nazi Holocaust gains so much attention when their are ones on going to this day and ones which are far worse than what Hitler did which go un-noticed.

    If it is going to be taught so much more than any other subject and in the 11 years I did history 6 of them were spent on the subject, I want to see facts. I want to see solid evidence and where is it? Where are these docuements people keep saying exist? To me it has never had enough research done on it and much of the evidence has yet to be published for people to make their own judgements. This doesn't help the cause to say it is 'fact' and it is the 'truth'.

    As for his motive? So what.

    If someone sets out to proove one thing and the truth comes out, I couldn't care as to why they set out to do it but rather the 'truth' which to me is more important. For all we know it might shock him and might be even worse than we think it is. What if it was?



    posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 05:42 PM
    link   
    Odium:


    If someone sets out to proove one thing and the truth comes out, I couldn't care as to why they set out to do it but rather the 'truth' which to me is more important. For all we know it might shock him and might be even worse than we think it is. What if it was?


    Again, you totally either disregarded or side-stepped what I mentioned: how extensively has the Holocaust been researched? As such, are you simply still believing that the numbers are not the truth or not adequately founded? I find it hard to believe that there is some still today having the belief that the Holocaust numbers are not accurate, again, especially as extenisively researched as the Holocaust has been already done.

    You dismiss motive as a simple so what.
    Again Odium, I asked you to be objective when applied to the how extensively the Holocaust has already been researched and studied. Objectively considering such, is there any valid question(s) as to why the numbers of people murdered during the Holocaust are not correct or valid? You see, knowing how extensively the Holocaust has been researched, I am quite aware of IHR's motive, as with others who continually dispute the Holocaust happening and/or the numbers of people murdered. Hence, to me, as with the historical academic fields and community, when applied to the continued desire to see the numbers murdered revised, motive is a major defining factor. Of all the genocides that have occurred in history, the Holocaust IS the most extensively researched and studied of all. Time and time again, the numbers have been verified and adequately quantified. Very little dispute within the academic community on this matter, but for years if not a decade or so, a few amatuer and academic historians have persisted in trying to undermine that extensively done research.

    Motive cannot and will not be dismissed as 'so what' with me or many of my academic colleagues. The "truth" or the pursuit of "truth", implying historical accuracy, is not their intentions and never has been!





    seekerof

    [edit on 17-11-2005 by Seekerof]



    posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 05:58 PM
    link   
    Seekerof, where is all of this research?*

    I have spent the last four years on this topic in College and the research and evidence is lacking. It doesn't hold up to historical tests and their is still much debate going on between the Functionalism and Intentionalism, which is key to the whole issue. If we silence one group, their voice, their views we run the risk of creating a bias which will only help them. Yes, many people have motives which I myself can't agree with [not just because I am on the Neo-Nazi hitlist] but to me it is wrong to not allow them to have their say.

    In fact, there have been recent rumours about that the U.S.S.R. might of had over 10million people killed in POW camps by the Nazi's, I will attempt to hunt out the information to you.


    * although I know a lot of research has been done very little of it has focused upon 'Non-Jewish' groups due to how difficult this is. Primarily because Slavs, Gypsies, etc, didn't keep a census or any records so how many of them was unknown. But still more needs to be done to help us find out what really went on.

    Something of Interest



    posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 06:08 PM
    link   
    Why can one not raise questions? There is a good deal of details about the Holocaust which can be questioned legitmately, one Holocaust Victim was supposed to be 130 some odd years old when she died in in a concentration camp, one example of many. The sign that hangs at Auschwitz has been changed repeatedly to refelct an ever decreasing number. The Red Cross documentation, says 100,000 were killed, far less than six million, a shadow of the number of confirmed deaths in the Zionist controlled Bolshevik Movement in Russia, and there are alot of if's and when's that just don't work out. Jews have been expelled from literally every nation in Europe at some point or another, and it's always invaribly been a case of some cruel hate mongerer just out to get the poor jews. Hitler was a monster, there's no doubt about it, but there's one hell of a lot more the story than you have been taught in history books. You want to know what really happened in Europe through the 1930's and 1940's, start with the Treaty of Versailles and follow the money, the real money.
    I don't want to get into alot of detail but the point is this, don't ever be afraid to question anything somebody tells you, ever.



    posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 06:16 PM
    link   

    as posted by Odium
    Seekerof, where is all of this research?*

    I have spent the last four years on this topic in College and the research and evidence is lacking. It doesn't hold up to historical tests and their is still much debate going on between the Functionalism and Intentionalism, which is key to the whole issue. If we silence one group, their voice, their views we run the risk of creating a bias which will only help them. Yes, many people have motives which I myself can't agree with [not just because I am on the Neo-Nazi hitlist] but to me it is wrong to not allow them to have their say.


    You have got to be kidding me.
    This is just using Google, not counting the academic electronic access [ie: JSTOR, etc] I have on campus, any campus: the Holocaust
    As for the evidence as lacking: hardly.

    And with Twitchy throwing up numbers [ie: Red Cross and 100,000] without sufficiently backing it is ludicrous, but 'a' typical.
    Academically researched, the numbers have been upwards of 10+ million, that is counting Jews and non-Jews.
    Here is a bit more on David Irving:


    It is tempting to say that anyone who would deny that the Nazis planned and carried out the murder of six million European Jews—the most exhaustively researched, documented, and attested-to genocide in history—must be deranged or diseased. But the Holocaust-deniers are neither crazy nor sick. They know what they are doing.
    ......
    That is what the deniers are aiming at: Acceptance of the idea that their hateful falsehoods are a legitimate "other side" of Holocaust history. The more they repeat that the Final Solution never happened, the more some people wonder: Well, did it? Each new seed of doubt grants Adolf Hitler a posthumous victory, and makes the destruction of the Six Million a little more complete."

    The Deniers' Real Goal

    As for those non-Jews murdered, you researched where, Odium?
    Overlooked Millions: Non-Jewish Victims of the Holocaust



    Table 1
    Estimates of Non-Combatant Lives Lost During the Holocaust

    Ukrainians 5.5 - 7 million
    Jews (of all countries) 6 million +
    Russian POWs 3.3 million +
    Russian Civilians 2 million +
    Poles 3 million +
    Yugoslavians 1.5 million +
    Gypsies 200,000 - 500,000
    Mentally/Physically Disabled 70,000- 250,000
    Homosexuals Tens of thousands
    Spanish Republicans Tens of thousands
    Jehovah's Witnesses 2,500 - 5,000
    Boy and Girl Scouts, Clergy, Communists, Czechs, Deportees, Greeks, Political Prisoners, Other POWs, Resistance Fighters, Serbs, Socialists, Trade Unionists, Others Unknown


    The or a bibliography and Notes are your best friend when researching.







    seekerof

    [edit on 17-11-2005 by Seekerof]



    posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 06:23 PM
    link   
    yeah, did u actually see the holocaust happen with you own eyes, or if you did, how do you know it wasn't a setup. If the main source of media was controlled and pics and footage were manipulated or forged it's not hard to create history. Especially if several governments were aligned in spreading and confirming the facts are 'true'. Thinkin about the concept of perception and reality very carefully and try and analyse it in depth. Then you'll find that there are many things which you can't completely confirm are true.



    posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 06:27 PM
    link   

    as posted by sugeshotcha
    yeah, did u actually see the holocaust happen with you own eyes, or if you did, how do you know it wasn't a setup.


    Uh...
    And you know that the Holocaust did not happen and was a set-up because.....you did not see it with your "own eyes"?

    Okie Dokie.




    seekerof



    posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 07:29 PM
    link   
    Please VOTE on stories poeple



    posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 07:45 PM
    link   
    heh hes getting what he's due. Its interesting that they have arrested him considering their Prime Minister for a long time was an ex Nazi.

    The problem with people like that is the event was so horrific and so terrible to minimise it plays into the hands of the neo facists. Its THAT aspect that makes holocaust deniers so repugnant.

    This is not just an intellectual argument about an aspect of history as Odium seems to allege. Its a denial of an aspect of very recent history that allows nazi's to get away with their sick ideology today. This is just two generations back from us. Its still current.

    If you can minimise the events of the holocaust you are one step closer to legimising and allowing the existance of a perverted ideology and belief system that literally caused the worst trouble the world has seen so far.


    [edit on 17-11-2005 by Netchicken]



    posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 01:15 PM
    link   


    If you can minimise the events of the holocaust you are one step closer to legimising and allowing the existance of a perverted ideology and belief system that literally caused the worst trouble the world has seen so far.


    The worst trouble the world has seen so far? That's so not true. Look at the Christians, who were mostly responsible for spreading the black plague, and slightly more than half responsible for the worst series of wars the world has ever known (crusades).

    As terrible as the Nazi ideology was, there are many other examples of extremism. I don't subscribe to any of them, and I don't like them, but I think there is merit in allowing people to speak their mind, no matter how infuriating it may be.

    Again, it's really not my business because I don't live in Austria.

    If the state says "this is the truth, and if you disagree we'll imprison you", I think it's dangerously easy for the situation to get out of control quickly. I shouldn't have to make this point, I really thought this was widely understood by civilized people.

    Doesn't anyone remember the fallout from communist thought control programs? The millions of lives lost in re-education camps?

    It's entirely understandable that when a guy says something infuriating, that we don't agree with, we wanna lock him up. But that doesn't make it right.



    posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 01:21 PM
    link   
    Netchicken,



    If you can minimise the events of the holocaust you are one step closer to legimising and allowing the existance of a perverted ideology and belief system that literally caused the worst trouble the world has seen so far.

    Where was this argument during the recent hubbub over the Japanese downplaying certain events in their history? You know like the Nanjing Massacre that the new Japanese history books say was only an incident and in all but one case, does not bother to list the number of civilians that were murdered?

    If it okay for Japan to deny or minimize their history and crimes, why is it different for the Holocost?



    posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 01:40 PM
    link   
    Oooohhhh debate... sort of...

    WyrdeOne where did you get that point from?


    Look at the Christians, who were mostly responsible for spreading the black plague, and slightly more than half responsible for the worst series of wars the world has ever known (crusades).


    Don't the fleas actually have any responsability in the matter. What ethnic group do you blame for the Spanish flu in 1917? - The spanish? How about Aids? - Sub Saharan Africans?

    kenshiro2012 I fail to see where i downplayed the historical responsability of the japanese in my post, that responsabilty was not an issue in the debate over holocaust deniers as far as I know.

    I fail to see Japanese extremism is a threat to Western values and thought, whereas a resurgence of Nazism is always a threat still in some countries, look at the right wing parties in England, White Supremisists in America, and East German extremist groups.

    Apart from that holocaust deniers go against the facts of the near historial period of WW2, that are still in the minds of the living. (take the other thread here on jewish survivors digging up their valuables they hid during WW2 outside the extermination camps for example).

    This is not a matter of "I think that the holocaust didn't happen" is just freedom of speach being removed, as Holocaust deniers are not just debating an historial point but attempting historical revisionism to justify and promote a corrupt and destructive ideology.

    I think that people who don't understand the importance of preserving this truth are also truely unaware of the immense suffering, persecution and destruction that occured during WW2, because of the twisted ideologies of a few. That evil should never be allowed to raise its head again.

    I remember a thread we had here on this topic where a poster tried to deny the holocaust,. The only thing we had to do to refute it was to post the pictures from the net of the shattered starved individuals liberated from the camps, and the piles of bodies stacked against the razor wire.

    The truth is that real, that strong, that present to deny it requires suth a suspension of belief as to show its not just ingnorance but deliberate.

    When we posted those pics the members's only response was to blame us for being too gruesome and that such images should not be allowed on the baord.

    [edit on 18-11-2005 by Netchicken]



    posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 01:56 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by Netchicken
    kenshiro2012 I fail to see where i downplayed the historical responsability of the japanese in my post, that responsabilty was not an issue in the debate over holocaust deniers as far as I know.

    I fail to see Japanese extremism is a threat to Western values and thought, whereas a resurgent of Nazism is alays a threat still in some countires, look at the right wing parties in England, White Supremisists in America, and East German extremist groups.

    Apart from that holocaust deniers not only go against the facts of the near historial period of WW2, (take the other thread here on jewish survivors digging up their valuables they hid during WW2 outside the extremist camps for example).

    This is not a matter of "I think that the holocaust didn't happen" is just freedom of speach being removed, as Holocaust deniers are not just debating an historial point but attempting historical revisionism to justify and promote a corrupt and destructive ideology.

    I think that people who don't understand the importance of preserving this truth are also truely unaware of the immense suffering, persecution and destruction that occured during WW2, because of the twisted ideologies of a few. That evil should never be allowed to raise it head again.

    We are on the same page...sort of

    I was not attempting to say the historical responsibilities of the Japanese. I presented the Japanese attempts to re-write / downplay their history to the general public here, not just to you (sorry).
    When the news was flying about all the halabahoo going on in asia over this, many here on ATS, found no fault with what the Japanese were doing.
    Now that, someone has been arrested for questioning the Holocost, many do not see what is wrong with him questioning history.
    I support the ability to question history as well as Irving's right to free speech. Only by questioning everthing, can the truth be known to all.

    The biggest problem that I have on this whole deal is that yes it is against his an Englishman's freedom of speech. Yet, he enters a country (Austria) where by excersing his privledges in England he is arrested and now faces 20 years in prison.
    Does no one else see a problem with this?



    new topics

    top topics



     
    7
    << 1    3  4  5 >>

    log in

    join