Germans angry

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Combat Ingrid


Then Iran should jail them for denying that the holocaust didn't happen

so send along some security for them. A couple of armored divisions would do the trick, I would think.

[Colon™]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Allow or invite? A holocaust denier WOULD be allowed at a US holocaust conference - and WE, not Germany or Austria or France, are the Great Satan after all. He probably wouldnt be INVITED by serious scholars though, for the same reason flat earthers generally arent invited to conferences on geology, etc, etc.

LOTM, what are you trying to tell me? I was commenting on the European position on this matter, in response on a post made by a European, in a thread that deals with the reaction of a European country.

And it's hard to be allowed somewhere if they won't invite you.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Colon™


LOTM, what are you trying to tell me? I was commenting on the European position on this matter, in response on a post made by a European, in a thread that deals with the reaction of a European country.

And it's hard to be allowed somewhere if they won't invite you.

I was merely suggesting that if the Iranians cry hypocrisy, it would ring hollow. The West per se allows holocaust denial, even if some euro states do not.

As for not being allowed if not invited, I disagree. The govt allows people to go or not go to places - the German state does not ALLOW holocaust denial, while the US does. Invitations to academic conferences in the West are typically made by academics, based on criteria of academic seriousness. Not being invited isnt the same as not being allowed. I wouldnt be invited to a conference on Slavic studies, to present my paper claiming that all Russians are descended from the lost tribes of Israel, because, you know, im not a published scholar in Slavic Studies, and my paper isnt backed up serious scholarship. No serious conference on Modern European History would invite holocaust deniers for precisely the same reasons.

[Colon™]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
The West per se allows holocaust denial, even if some euro states do not.

And I was talking about Europe, not the west in general. Not sure how the confusion arose considering I specifically wrote "Europe" and "European".

[lord of the mark]

"They probably won't allow a holocaust-denier on a European holocaust-conference either. Europe at least is on shaky moral grounds in this matter..."


Im not sure what the point of the above statement is. Europe is on shaky moral grounds because SOME european states, (NOT ALL), dont allow holocaust deniers are holocaust conferences?

1. The principle European states that ban holocaust denial, do so because the holocaust was a central moral AND political issue for them, because their acknowledgement of it was part of their return to "acceptable society" and denial (which was no small temptation in post-war Germany) would have endangered their international standing. This is in no way comparable to Irans situation

2. Those European countries that ban holocaust denial are in fact banning spread of falsehoods. Now Im an American, a first amendment believer, and of course I understand why the spread of falsehoods has to be defended in a liberal, democratic society, and why the state shouldnt go around banning what it determines to be falsehoods. But that does NOT mean that a ban on falsehood, however misguided, is morally comparable to a state effort to spread falsehood.

3. I presumed you meant Europe was on shaky moral ground critizing Iran for denying academic freedom. First, I would respond that the anger cited in the OP was not about Irans denial of academic freedom, but about its fostering and spreading of falsehoods. Second, I would suggest that the denial of academic freedom is pervasive in Iran, on issues more central to Iranian society than the holocaust is to contemporary Europe.

4. Who has the moral standing to attack Europe for hypocrisy? Since its Iran that Europe is criticizing, it must be Iran. But Irans assertion, IIUC, is that holocaust denial is banned as a way of supporting the legitimacy of Israel. The very country in the West that has been most supportive of Israel is the US, and the US quite specifically doesnt ban holocaust denial.

5. Moving away from the actions of states, there is certainly no moral obligation on academics to invite frauds and charlatans to academic conferences. Are we on shaky moral grounds because flat earthers are not invited to science conferences?

[Colon™]

*groan*

Look. Wernuzema stated that they wouldn't let a Palestinian historician argue the holocaust did happen, implying the conference doesn't allow free debate. I pointed out the reverse wouldn't happen in (the majority) of Europe either, implying that Europe's position is shaky on this matter. You replied by stating the US would allow a holocaust denier and by pointing out the US is the Great Satan to Iran. Neither of those two points contradicted anything I said, considering I specifically was talking about Europe. Therefore, your post was completely redundant as are any of your posts afterwards.

Please stop reading things in (my?) posts that aren't written there, it's immensely irritating.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Colon™
*groan*

Look. Wernuzema stated that they wouldn't let a Palestinian historician argue the holocaust did happen, implying the conference doesn't allow free debate. I pointed out the reverse wouldn't happen in (the majority) of Europe either, implying that Europe's position is shaky on this matter.

I simply deny that this makes Europes position shaky, for reasons ive stated above.

[Dis]

It's pretty easy to see they are only doing this to piss jews off. They are just like a common internet troll.

ignore them.

[Heresson]

pissing off jews

[Dinner]

[Heresson]

pissing of Oerdin by saying to pissing off Jews

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
I said educated people. We have two educated Indias who post here regularly, why dont we ask them?

Ah, because they are not a worthwhile representative set of general opinion or knowledge in India? That seems simple enough to see.

Some Russian POWs WERE gassed, and indeed some of the gassing techniques were tried out on them first.

The numbers gassed were insignificant to the numbers who died. Gas chambers are simply not a significant cause for Soviet POW deaths.

Im not real familiar with the details of deniers claims, but it would seem very difficult to deny what happened to the Jews without at the same time denying or distorting much of the truth about what happened to the Russians.

Why exactly? In the Holocaust you had an active campaign to isolate a particular population, transport them halfway accross Europe many times, an expensive system of building new railways, camps, and the machinery of death. The HOlocaust is an active campaign of extermination. Soviet prisoners were the byproducts of military victory, and their deaths were almost primarily the cause of a campaign of neglect, of simply not providing the basic needs of human beings. I fail to see why denying active homicide would entail also denying passive homicide.

I cant believe that wouldnt anger Russians. While there is antisemitism in Russian society, I dont think its nearly as important a force as Russias sense of victimization by the Nazis. There is even, I think, some pride at Russias role as liberator of the death camps.

First, I have seen no announcements in the Western Press of any significant statements of condemnation for the conference by the Russian Government or media. Second, given that you don;t know what the position of a Holocaust denier would be vis a vi the deaths of Soviet POWs, what is the point of speculating? As for the Russians feeling pride in liebrating the death camps, certainly there is such, but then there is also the pride of winning the war and blasting Berlin to heck. Its not like forgetting the HOlocaust would make the Russians celebrate their victory over Germany any less.

The question I rise is not how uniquely the Russians should view anything in particular, but how they should feel about a denial of historical fact, that (I think) inevitably calls into question other historical facts of great importance to them.

By your logic, EVERYONE should be outraged by the denial of any historical fact since then all historical facts are at issue. But then, of course, that assumed everyone agrees with Historical facts. I think most Russians would state that the Great Patriotic War was a rigging success. Many people west of Russia would not. I think what happened with the celebrations of the end of the second world war last year more than show that there is hardly agreement over historical fact. I think your average Russian cares more about the people of the Baltic states bemoning Soviet victory in WW2 more than they care about Holocaust deniers, as one actively undermines their national sense of pride while the latter merely serves to lessen the extensive evil of their foe.

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
A story that combines Iranian oppression of its own dissidents, with the issue of the conference.

http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level_English.php?cat=Religion&loid=8.0.368122129&par=0

so much for the idea that Iranians dont know or care about the truth.

Actually, those people are lucky not to have been arrested long ago, after all, the story stated that they are apostates, one of the worst sins against Islam.

[lord of the mark]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by GePap

" what is the point of speculating?"


Actually it was YOU who started the speculation, with no particular evidence.

"I doubt China, India, and Russia give a damn."


wiki:

"Russian prisoners of war were used for experiments, such as being immersed in ice water or being put into pressure chambers in which air was evacuated to see how long they would survive as a means to better protect German airmen."

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap
First, I have seen no announcements in the Western Press of any significant statements of condemnation for the conference by the Russian Government or media.

"Russia rejected comments by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad describing the Holocaust as a myth and calling for the state of Israel to be moved as far away as Alaska, AFP reported.

"Attempts to revise the commonly accepted facts of World War II, including with regard to the Holocaust, are unacceptable," Russia's Foreign Ministry said in a written reaction to Ahmadinejad's televised comments.

"Russia views Israel as a sovereign state, having the right to live in peace and security side by side with its neighbours, including an independent Palestinian state," the statement continued.

Russia enjoys close ties with Iran, reflected in Moscow's assistance to Tehran in developing nuclear energy and underscored this week by a visit to Moscow by Iranian parliament speaker Gholam Ali Haddad Adel."