Another try at defining "Holocaust Denier" Part II

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
Tero
Member
Posts: 559
Joined: 24 Jul 2002 07:06
Location: Finland

Post by Tero » 11 Jan 2006 12:01

By DXTR
I found it to be a flaw in Tyrians claim, that he was looking for the truth, since a trained historian would never claim that the truth existed as some sort of information that did not need interpretation either by the one who originally created this information or the one who discovered it. Therefore there can never be a "numerical truth"
I think that may be a misunderstanding brought on by differences in languages.

Nobody in their right mind would claim the Tsunami of 2004 killed a lot of people and that the order of magnitude is what it has been reported to be, right ? Now, in 60 years I do not see it unlikely people could start guestioning the number of dead at being hundreds of thousands, only because there is archival evidence of only the tourists who were killed in the disaster. Hence people could claim only a couple of thousand "people" were killed and not the enormous amount the period news media "would have us believe".

Another example is the numer of Red Army KIA during Winter War. Molotov claimed under 50 000, Chrustsev over a million casualties. Contemporary Russian research has put the number at around 130 000 KIA. The Finnish estimate has been 200 000 since 1940.

This is why I think there can be absolute (or very close to being that) truths when it comes to numbers and other quantifiable and verifiable data. And this is why there is some merit in Tyrians angle of approach.

tonyh
Member
Posts: 2911
Joined: 19 Mar 2002 12:59
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Post by tonyh » 11 Jan 2006 15:33

David Thompson wrote:Larry D.'s remarks are neither insulting nor threatening. "I/ we've got your number" is an English idiom meaning "I/ we understand what you're talking about," or "I/ we understand your position/ outlook/ agenda."
Aye......but it can also mean "I know what you're REALLY trying to say."

Tony

User avatar
R.M. Schultz
Member
Posts: 3062
Joined: 05 Feb 2003 03:44
Location: Chicago

Post by R.M. Schultz » 11 Jan 2006 20:25

tonyh wrote:Aye......but it can also mean "I know what you're REALLY trying to say."
That’s what I’ve been wondering — what are you really trying to say?

Tero
Member
Posts: 559
Joined: 24 Jul 2002 07:06
Location: Finland

Post by Tero » 12 Jan 2006 06:09

tonyh wrote:
David Thompson wrote:Larry D.'s remarks are neither insulting nor threatening. "I/ we've got your number" is an English idiom meaning "I/ we understand what you're talking about," or "I/ we understand your position/ outlook/ agenda."
Aye......but it can also mean "I know what you're REALLY trying to say."

Tony
Being a non-native speaker I would put the emphasis on the UNDERSTAND/KNOW part. Which would IMO put an iniuendoish spin on the remark. In any case, if somebody says he has the other guys number I would rate the remark as being somewhat hostile. Thanks to TV and cinema use of the parlance.

Tero
Member
Posts: 559
Joined: 24 Jul 2002 07:06
Location: Finland

Post by Tero » 12 Jan 2006 06:11

R.M. Schultz wrote:
tonyh wrote:Aye......but it can also mean "I know what you're REALLY trying to say."
That’s what I’ve been wondering — what are you really trying to say?
Lets hear the man out before you start oiling the rope and breaking out the pitchforks and torches.

tonyh
Member
Posts: 2911
Joined: 19 Mar 2002 12:59
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Post by tonyh » 12 Jan 2006 11:46

R.M. Schultz wrote:
tonyh wrote:Aye......but it can also mean "I know what you're REALLY trying to say."
That’s what I’ve been wondering — what are you really trying to say?
huh?????

If theres one thing I'm not shy about, its giving my opinion on something. If you want to know "what" I am "really trying to say", read my posts.

Tony

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23721
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 19:52
Location: USA

Post by David Thompson » 12 Jan 2006 16:23

Let's drop the personal exchanges and leave it at this -- I don't think Larry D.'s remark was insulting or threatening, and did not violate the forum rules on civility. This view comports with the forum and section goals, namely:
The policy and general purpose of the forum is to provide for an exchange of views and facts on the topic, and to allow discussion of the different points of view. The viewpoints expressed by contributors to this forum are so divergent that general agreement on almost any aspect of the holocaust is unlikely and disagreement will be the rule.

Under these circumstances, in my opinion the best policy is to provide as many facts on the issue as possible, allow the contributors to state their point of view in a civil manner, and let the readers make up their own minds. To promote these purposes, there are rules:
H&WC Section Rules
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=53962

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23721
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 19:52
Location: USA

Post by David Thompson » 12 Jan 2006 22:24

An exchange of posts between Larry D. and Tyrian were deleted by this moderator, pursuant to prior warnings in this thread to move on, avoid personal remarks and stay on topic -- DT.

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 753#830753
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 828#830828
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 847#830847
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 916#831916

Further off-topic or insulting posts will be deleted without further warning.

User avatar
cyberdaemon
Member
Posts: 424
Joined: 11 Mar 2004 22:04
Location: estonia

Post by cyberdaemon » 28 Jan 2006 15:57

i got one short question.
why people , who even question in offical history of holocaust are arrested ? oftenly they lose theyr jobs face the jail and whe any doctor decides to talk about it , he faces the threat to lose hes academic degree! so , now even asking questions and not believeing is a crime!!! and why is this being happening to the holocaust only ? what kind of truth is a truth that is protected by law and punishmen ? what kind of truth needed to be protected by censors , who says what offends these victims and what not ? and why isnt there any penalty to those who question in the crimes of communism ? or those who question in any other parts of a history ? if you deny that millions really died under the terror of staling , now one will punish you.why ? its offending too , you know.i got an idea - lets arrest all those , who question in soviet camps , cambodia or the fact that USA liberated iraq from evil ? lets but em all into jail!!! lets discredit them and call them "terroritst" , "nazis" and "dangerous people" ?
edit : oops , its not so short... :roll:

User avatar
gaussianum
Member
Posts: 195
Joined: 23 Jan 2006 21:25
Location: Iberian Peninsula

Post by gaussianum » 28 Jan 2006 20:59

It is a known fact that throughout history, people who challenge established views on nature, religion, or history, are often persecuted, incarcerated and killed. Even asking a simple question is enough to start a process of analysys, that some people, for perhaps political reasons, fear to the utmost degree. The answer to your question is simple: politics and power.

User avatar
gaussianum
Member
Posts: 195
Joined: 23 Jan 2006 21:25
Location: Iberian Peninsula

Post by gaussianum » 28 Jan 2006 21:16

As proof to the above, I post a quick excerpt from Galileo's biography, from BBC History:

"The result of the trial was, of course, never in doubt. The Vatican showed that Galileo was 'suspect of heresy' having held a view that went against holy scripture. His specific crime was believing that 'the Sun is the centre of the world and does not move from east to west'. He was sentenced to life imprisonment, though this was reduced to permanent house-arrest at his villa in Arcetri. Perhaps worse Galileo was forced to Abjure, in other words to confess his views and to condemn them:(...)"

You can read the full article here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_f ... ileo.shtml

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23721
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 19:52
Location: USA

Post by David Thompson » 28 Jan 2006 22:30

Let's get back on topic. Every century has geniuses, reformers, revolutionaries, reactionaries, dreamers and crackpots, all of whom challenge the "established order," and only a few of which are ever vindicated. R.M. Schultz is trying to come up with a hypothetical definition of a "holocaust denier." Do our readers have anything more to offer?

nickterry
Member
Posts: 724
Joined: 16 Jan 2006 23:20
Location: Bristol

Post by nickterry » 29 Jan 2006 00:44

Yes, weren't people supposed to be discussing a definition of Holocaust denial?

For succinctness, I think Richard Evan's summary is hard to beat:

"a) The number of Jews killed by the Nazis was far less than six million; it amounted to only a few hundred thousand, and was thus similar to, or less than, the number of German civilians killed in Allied bombing raids.

b) Gas chambers were not used to kill large numbers of Jews at any time

c) Neither Hitler nor the Nazi leadership in general had a programme of exterminating Europe's Jews, all they wished to do was to deport them to Eastern Europe

d) 'The Holocaust' was a myth invented by Allied propaganda during the war and sustained since then by Jews who wished to use it to gain political and financial support for the state of Israel or for themselves. The supposed evidence for the Nazis' wartime mass murder of millions of Jews by gassing and other means was fabricated after the war."

(Telling Lies About Hitler, pp.118-119)

Note that I don't think it necessary for someone to have to agree with all four principles to qualify as a denier.

For example, someone like Carlo Mattogno generally sticks slavishly to proving that the gas chambers did not exist, ie his form of denial comes under (b). He has less to say about the other tendencies

Irving moved from espousing (c) with Hitler's War to endorsing the Leuchter report and thus espousing (b). He then elaborated and started making various statements which tend towards (a) and (d) as well.

Many politically motivated deniers, since they're not historians and don't bother with documents, stick to variations on (d). I.e., 'the Jews' gain from this story, therefore it can't be true.

For a really thorough demolition of denier methodologies, see John Zimmermann's excellent book (can't remember the title right now - but john zimmermann holocaust denial will definitely find it on Google/Amazon).

User avatar
gaussianum
Member
Posts: 195
Joined: 23 Jan 2006 21:25
Location: Iberian Peninsula

Post by gaussianum » 29 Jan 2006 02:19

I think Cyberdaemon should have started a new thread, called " Why are holocaust deniers persecuted? ", since his question appears to be that, and not exactly what the definition of holocaust denial is.

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23721
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 19:52
Location: USA

Post by David Thompson » 29 Jan 2006 03:00

We have a large number of threads on the European anti-denial laws and revisionism in the H&WC section, many of which are still open. Here's a partial list; for more try the forum search engine at http://forum.axishistory.com/search.php

Why does people afraid of Revisionist?
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=42833
The "myths" about the Holocaust
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=37190
Is Holocaust denial equal to "moral bankruptsy"
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=36792
Revisionism
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=27372
What kind of argument is this?
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=25869
Apologia for Genocide
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=25141
What purpose does Holocaust denial serve ?
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=23143
Revisionist history as a positive approarch
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=23087
holosaust denial
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=18315
Roberto, Witness & Maple01 Critique Scott Smith's Reason
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=18209
Hitchens, Kissinger, and the smear of Holocaust Denial
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=13989
Debate the Holocaust
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=11085
Question to Roberto
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=8997
Why Give the Deniers Ammunition - the Jewish Lies
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=6226
Revisisionists focus...
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=6109
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=5949
Why does "Holocaust Revisionism" sounds hollow
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=4982
I got a suggestion!
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=3218
Revisionists vs. Belivers
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=1786
Revisionism In a Nutshell
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=478
Skeptism vs. Holocaust denial
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=456
David Irving and the Klessheim Conference
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=17408
David Irving Stops Sale of Evans Book
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=17798
Suggested reading - Telling Lies about Hitler
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=16859
David Irving
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=2900
A question for Michael Mills
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=3141
List of double standards and injustice of Nuremberg Trial
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=55352
Dresden Bombing? & Post Liberation Eastern Euro gas Cham
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=33480
Freedom of speech and forum rules
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=54764
Deniers -- Don't ask, don't tell
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=55727

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”