format_quote Originally Posted by
czgibson
1. I'm not sure what the topic here actually is. Your line of questioning has been very unclear all along.
2. I'm asking about the law that you keep mentioning that supposedly bans research into the Holocaust. Students studying for exams the world over have to research into the Holocaust, and if you think there's a difference between them and the likes of Irving, Garaudy etc., think very carefully about what that difference is.
You are now saying that you don't want to talk about the law anymore, but it looks like your whole case stands or falls on that issue. So where is it?
Peace
The only thing that is clear is that you are desperately trying to twist the issue away from where it started.
Anyone here looking at my opening post will see that I mentioned clearly that the law bans any research that goes AGAINST the holocaust, you keep repeating that I am claiming the law prevents research PERIOD. Any look at my opening post will also show that it was all about understanding the moral and ethical implications of holocaust and my attempt to understanding why people are so aghast when they hear someone denies the holocaust, you keep trying to tel us that it's about the law and want to run around proving a claim that I did not make in the first place.
If you can't keep up with an intelligent conversation and follow a simple subject fairly and impartially, then stay out of it.
format_quote Originally Posted by guestfellow
Can anyone state the legislation that prevents people denying the Holocaust? It would state very clearly whether it imprisons those who deny the Holocaust and whether or not if it prevents academics to study the Holocaust.
I couldn't find the letter of the law as well, but what I found was that it bans denial, as well as negationism or publication of any reference to negationism. (Please look up
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revisionism. You'll even notice that Holocaust revisionism ties directly to Holocaust denial) Negationism is a title apparently called on anything that attempts to discuss contradictions or weaknesses in the holocaust, as they are classed attempts to deny holocaust. Since the law also says no one can
make reference to a negationist theory, no one would be able to publish work that discusses or includes any of that work. That was the official charge on Plantin.
format_quote Originally Posted by Hugo
You saying "I am not interested in it" tells us all we need to know. How can the deaths of 6 million be of no interest? Are you not keen even passionate to make sure it never happens again?
Please bare with me, I promise you I am legitimately concerned and interested in this not just arguing you into frustration.
I said I am not interested in... as in not interested in denying the holocaust. Is this what psychologists call a freudian slip? For the second time I explain clearly that I am not denying the holocaust yet it seems that there is so much conditioning to the western mind when someone asks questions is that "he is just denying the holocaust, ATTACK!"
Now when it comes to your other questions, I will use them to further my point of view: yes it's a tragedy that 6 million died. But to ask YOU the same question: Why would the 6 million be MORE IMPORTANT than the 70 million others who died in WW2 who don't have such a systematic protectionism method? Why more important than the 4 million Palestinians and Arabs who died as a result of the nation formed out of repayment for the Holocaust, or more important that the million Iraqis WHO ARE BEING denied even the title of being invaded? Why more important than the millions who died in the cambodian genocide, or the 30 million massacred in China since Mao came into power?
So yes, I am very passionate that NO GENOCIDE happens ever again, but when I see a money making machine and demands at people and countries to gain retribution after compensation, and then a bit of a stink comes from behind them that is being protected from checking on contradictions, then yes I want to passionately ask: what is going on and what is being hidden here, and why the moral drama of checking those details?
You do seem to have a propensity to ignore that facts. It is true that large numbers of Jews and Christians lived under Islamic rule but sadly it is also true that they were often vilified and certainly treated as second class citizens until the Colonial powers put a stop to it.
There you go! There is no law preventing you from making such a claim, is there?! Now people can freely research and publish their own twisted or correct versions.
Strangely enough though what you just mentioned, is specifically mentioned in negationism, and
is ALSO protected by french law, that textbooks MUST mention the positive side to colonialism.
format_quote Originally Posted by wikipedia
On 23 February 2005, the Union for a Popular Movement (UMP) conservative majority at the French National Assembly voted a law compelling history textbooks and teachers to ". . . acknowledge and recognize in particular the positive role of the French presence abroad, especially in North Africa". [17] Criticized by historians and teachers, among them Pierre Vidal-Naquet, who refused to recognise the French Parliament's right to influence the way history is written, (despite the French Holocaust denial laws, see Loi Gayssot). That law was also challenged by left-wing parties and the former French colonies; critics argued that the law was tantamount to refusing to acknowledge the racism inherent to French colonialism, and that the law proper is a form of historical revisionism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_revisionism_(negationism)#French_law_re cognising_colonialism.27s_.22positive_value.22
Now you ask any person in the World about colonialism and they will tell you that that is complete hogwash to talk about colonialism "freeing" the jews and christians. It was outright invasion likened to the crusades, and caused the deaths of millions of civilians, and is an atrocity that in this case if any one was less than an outright hypocrit would not dare glorify the holocaust and then dare praise colonialism.
So tell me again, where does the morality deficiency come to denial of the holocaust, but you freely claim your right to claim colonialism as liberation, and ignore the millions of deaths caused?