Anyone seen this?

[Colleen Thomas]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060220/ap_on_re_eu/austria_holocaust_denial

I don't like revisionist historians. I have utter contempt for those who wish to deny or try to mitigate the holocuast. But jail time for expousing an admittedly stupid premise?

 

[ABSTRUSE]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060220/ap_on_re_eu/austria_holocaust_denial

I don't like revisionist historians. I have utter contempt for those who wish to deny or try to mitigate the holocuast. But jail time for expousing an admittedly stupid premise?

That seems a little much.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

It seems extreme... but a law's a law, I guess

the law itself is questionable to me... limiting freedom of speech is not something I'm for, even if idiots get to say whatever they want...

this isn't yelling fire in a crowded theater... this is just trying to convince people the fire never happened... not quite the same, to me...

 

[Guest]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060220/ap_on_re_eu/austria_holocaust_denial

I don't like revisionist historians. I have utter contempt for those who wish to deny or try to mitigate the holocuast. But jail time for expousing an admittedly stupid premise?

The law seems very odd and I wonder if it has been challenged.

But then again, this guy and others like him horrify me. To claim there are no gas chambers at Auschwitz? What kind of a thought process is that? You can see them on the tour - anyone can.

Maybe he needs to be locked up for his own health and safety.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Rather Orwellian of an approach, if you ask me. Whatever happened to free speech? Believe me, there is no danger of most intelligent people, myself included, buying into that kind of shit, so why trample the asshole's rights and become the very thing that he espouses- a fascist? Well, the Euros are not soft on EVERYTHING, it seems!

 

[Sex and Death]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060220/ap_on_re_eu/austria_holocaust_denial

I don't like revisionist historians. I have utter contempt for those who wish to deny or try to mitigate the holocuast. But jail time for expousing an admittedly stupid premise?

Anyone espousing such view is not going to change any minds worth having around. Seems that free speech far outweighs the vengeful anger and over-controlling fear in which this law is probably based.

Give folks with these views enough rope and they will hang themselves.

 

[Rope64]

It would be better if such things were treated according to something like libel/slander laws, such that you can say anything you want, but if it's harmful to someone (all Jews in the case of Holocaust denial?), you'd better be able to prove what you say, or at least (in the US) prove that you were not negligent or malicious in saying something false.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

The law seems very odd and I wonder if it has been challenged.

But then again, this guy and others like him horrify me. To claim there are no gas chambers at Auschwitz? What kind of a thought process is that? You can see them on the tour - anyone can.

Maybe he needs to be locked up for his own health and safety.

Most "historians" of his stripe claim a massive, pervasive and sinister conspiaracy. In his view, the gas chamber were built by the allies as part of this ruse. What they don't want to deal with and have never been able to explain away is the fact the death chambers and creamatoria at Aushwitz are clearly visible in war time reconisance photos. It is the bane of this type of "scholar" that Birkenaue was used as a forced labor reserve for the I.G. Farbin synthetic plant. That was a high priority target as early in the war as 1944.

So the wartime recon photos of it, as well as bomb damage assessment photos, incvariably show parts of Aushwitz and Birkenau. Those photos are impossible to explain away, especially since they show recent bomb damage.

I've often expressed a desire to see revisionist historians hanged, but that has always been in jest. I'm not too comfortable with passing a law that removes the freedom to dispute historical fact.

He's an idiot. And most probably a turd too. But I'm kinda uneasy with him serving time in jail for being one.

 

[rgraham666]

I'm mixed as well. I'd settle for just giving the asshole a shot in the mouth.

On the other hand, freedom of speech was never meant to be unlimited. And considering the recent outbreak of anti-Semitism there, maybe the authourities in Austria decided a message had to be sent.

 

[Liar]

Won't this just make him a martyr for the neonazis?

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

I'm not a neo-Nazi, but I am uncompromising when it comes to free speech. I don't support the censorship of ANY beliefs or views, no matter how repulsive they are to me!

 

[minsue]

If'n ya can't do the time....

He knew the law before he broke it.

The law may be a bit much, but that's what happens when a people try to atone for their past. The pendulum swings too far the other way.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

If'n ya can't do the time....

He knew the law before he broke it.

The law may be a bit much, but that's what happens when a people try to atone for their past. The pendulum swings too far the other way.

Too true. If you're a visiter in a foerign country, you ought to be aware of their laws & customs.

 

[R. Richard]

Most "historians" of his stripe claim a massive, pervasive and sinister conspiaracy. In his view, the gas chamber were built by the allies as part of this ruse. What they don't want to deal with and have never been able to explain away is the fact the death chambers and creamatoria at Aushwitz are clearly visible in war time reconisance photos. It is the bane of this type of "scholar" that Birkenaue was used as a forced labor reserve for the I.G. Farbin synthetic plant. That was a high priority target as early in the war as 1944.

So the wartime recon photos of it, as well as bomb damage assessment photos, incvariably show parts of Aushwitz and Birkenau. Those photos are impossible to explain away, especially since they show recent bomb damage.

I've often expressed a desire to see revisionist historians hanged, but that has always been in jest. I'm not too comfortable with passing a law that removes the freedom to dispute historical fact.

He's an idiot. And most probably a turd too. But I'm kinda uneasy with him serving time in jail for being one.

I too am uneasy with him serving time in jail for expressing his opinion. However, you have actually stated the solution. The man is simply uneducated. He needs to be educated as to the facts in the matter. Thus, I would have sentenced him to repeat the 9th through 12th grade. He could then have learned the facts. Best of all, he would do so at the same rate of pay as the other studetns in the same grade and paid his own expenses.

JMHO.

 

[Guest]

I too am uneasy with him serving time in jail for expressing his opinion. However, you have actually stated the solution. The man is simply uneducated. He needs to be educated as to the facts in the matter. Thus, I would have sentenced him to repeat the 9th through 12th grade. He could then have learned the facts. Best of all, he would do so at the same rate of pay as the other studetns in the same grade and paid his own expenses.

JMHO.

But that would also sentence teachers and teenagers to having to deal with him.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

I too am uneasy with him serving time in jail for expressing his opinion. However, you have actually stated the solution. The man is simply uneducated. He needs to be educated as to the facts in the matter. Thus, I would have sentenced him to repeat the 9th through 12th grade. He could then have learned the facts. Best of all, he would do so at the same rate of pay as the other studetns in the same grade and paid his own expenses.

JMHO.

Frankly, highschool dosen't do a good job of dealing with the various rediculous revisionist positions. Teachers should really take the time to explain and debunk them. Most of those who expouse them are first class sophists. And, unfortunetly, a lot of otherwise intelligent people are taken in by their tactics.

 

[Vincent E]

What I find odd is that this law was introduced in 1992 - forty-seven years after WWII ended. I can see a country passing something like this in the immediate aftermath of the Holocost so as to prevent Nazi sympathizers from getting in on the ground floor of Holocost-denial. Sometimes it isn't the victors who get to write history, but those who start writing it first.

However, I can only wonder how much of a problem denying the Holocost was in the 1990s.

 

[kendo1]

Neo nazis were on the rise.
The law was passed so that people would not forget what happened, and prevent the rewriting of history.
The same in Germany.

He knew the law before he went there.

When in Rome...

 

[BlackShanglan]

Most "historians" of his stripe claim a massive, pervasive and sinister conspiaracy. In his view, the gas chamber were built by the allies as part of this ruse. What they don't want to deal with and have never been able to explain away is the fact the death chambers and creamatoria at Aushwitz are clearly visible in war time reconisance photos. It is the bane of this type of "scholar" that Birkenaue was used as a forced labor reserve for the I.G. Farbin synthetic plant. That was a high priority target as early in the war as 1944.

I believe his earlier arguments were that those buildings were there, but that the structures alleged to be gas pipes were not and/or that other structures were present that indicated another purpose. I have Michael Shermer's interesting analysis of the whole Holocaust-denial behavior around somewhere, but I am too indolent to dig it out. If I recall correctly, however, Irving has recanted his claim that there were no gas chambers and has now retrenched to a "the scale was nothing like it's claimed" position.

I don't agree with everything Shermer says - notably, I am a person of religious faith, which he views as a delusion as well - but his book Why People Believe Weird Things is very interesting reading. He draws a quite cogent connection between creation science and Holocaust denial via the concept of balance of evidence. Essentially, he says, Irving and anti-evolutionists make the same inherently flawed argument: "No one can show me one piece of evidence showing irrefutably that this is true!" Shermer argues that this in fact is the case - no one can show a single piece of irrefutable evidence - but this is because the nature of the events themselves is such that it's not possible to prove them with a single individual piece of evidence, any more than it's possible to show a single photograph of the sun rising every day. Quite a good point, I thought, and right at the bottom of most of Mr. Irving's insanity.

But I prize freedom of speech for objectionable people. I prefer it when jackasses bray to let me know they're coming. It's easier to avoid them that way.

 

[kendo1]

There was an interesting reply by a 91 yo concentration camp survivor today.
He abhored Shermer's views but respected his right to free speech.
It's partly what the war was fought for: freedom.

 

[Belegon]

This cuts right to the core of how dearly we really hold our rights.

"I may disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

I still believe that...even when I find the speech abhorrant.





Now, let me catch him alone in a back alley...but that's me enforcing my opinion of his need for re-education...or at least satisfying my selfish desire to have his jaw wired shut.

 

[NoJo]

Austrians are not allowed to deny the fact of the Holocaust, but a fair number of them approve of it.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

I believe his earlier arguments were that those buildings were there, but that the structures alleged to be gas pipes were not and/or that other structures were present that indicated another purpose. I have Michael Shermer's interesting analysis of the whole Holocaust-denial behavior around somewhere, but I am too indolent to dig it out. If I recall correctly, however, Irving has recanted his claim that there were no gas chambers and has now retrenched to a "the scale was nothing like it's claimed" position.

I don't agree with everything Shermer says - notably, I am a person of religious faith, which he views as a delusion as well - but his book Why People Believe Weird Things is very interesting reading. He draws a quite cogent connection between creation science and Holocaust denial via the concept of balance of evidence. Essentially, he says, Irving and anti-evolutionists make the same inherently flawed argument: "No one can show me one piece of evidence showing irrefutably that this is true!" Shermer argues that this in fact is the case - no one can show a single piece of irrefutable evidence - but this is because the nature of the events themselves is such that it's not possible to prove them with a single individual piece of evidence, any more than it's possible to show a single photograph of the sun rising every day. Quite a good point, I thought, and right at the bottom of most of Mr. Irving's insanity.

But I prize freedom of speech for objectionable people. I prefer it when jackasses bray to let me know they're coming. It's easier to avoid them that way.

The scale argument is the only one you cannot refute in the case of Aushwitz. The BDA photos are pretty irrefuteable. They are date stamped, and the assessments are coboborated because they are appended to the flight reports. Thus, you have a firm and irrefuteable date on them, coboborateive evidence, in the form of the flight reports of the recon pilots, as well as the debriefing of the crews who made the bomb runs they are accessing. Followed by orders for follow up raids and their BDAs.

Like I said, with the other camps, there isn't a photographic record. But the raids on the I.G. Farbin plant next to Biurkenau with their attendant military paper trail, are just undeinable. Even the "the allies created this" consipracy theory won't work, because the camp, creamtoria and gas chambers were clerely there, well before any alies could arrive to contrive them. Wile the allies were still bombing in fact.

 

[rgraham666]

Ideas rarely die.

There is a politician up here, who was running for head of one of Ontario's political parties.

One of his policies was to 'mark' the homeless, assign 'special constables' to round them up and create 'special camps' so they could live 'useful lives' once more.

He's now the Canadian finance minister.

 

[CharleyH]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060220/ap_on_re_eu/austria_holocaust_denial

I don't like revisionist historians. I have utter contempt for those who wish to deny or try to mitigate the holocuast. But jail time for expousing an admittedly stupid premise?

I do not deny anything that happened in the holocaust, but often wonder, as a human, if what we did to people, without much of a trial, especially the execution of those sorry saps from Belson, isn't really the same? We are so hate filled that it does not matter sometimes, as long as we get our revenge and we can put this to the test anywhere.

Many people here articulate it won't happen again, yet none actually see that it is happening, daily ... now. How little people really learn from the past, although we admire the ideology of the past and excuse the reactions of us, and our blame on ALL Germans. But would we really get up and stand for our beliefs when our lives are on the line? Would we not say "I AM AMERICAN" even when invading and killing another people for no reason?

Please recall why the US is in Iraq. Please remember propoganda. A simple thought.

Thanks for the article Colly.