- that is, past suffering shouldn't be used to justify imposing suffering.
it is because I have respect for those who suffered during the massacre that I think it's particularly disgusting how their memories are abused for political purposes. this is a perfect example. while i don't in any way mean to defend Ahmadinejad, this article is used to demonize him for political purposes. there are examples of many people in countries friendly to Israel who often say horribly anti-Semitic things including holocaust denial, but they get ignored especially by mainstream media because it would hurt them politically to target such people. But because it is politically convenient to target Iran, they do so.
Last, I disagree with michelle when she said (roughly) that "it's hypocritical to mention the holocaust in a political context" due to the fact that this is not a historical discussion on the holocaust and the article has obvious political implications.
Is it really surprising that the instances of holocaust denial by Iranian leaders get more media attention than when some random schmuck denies the holocaust? To begin with, Ahmadinejad is the leader OF AN ENTIRE F-ING COUNTRY! Also, he's said publicly that he seeks the destruction of Israel (you know, the state of the people targeted by the holocaust, which he denies happened), and he's in the process of building illegal nuclear weapons. As Stephen Colbert put it so eloquently the other day (read with loads of sarcasm) "yeah, why would the Israelis be paranoid about a guy who says he want's to kill them building nuclear weapons?" Anyways, I don't think that the holocaust is used to justify political actions nearly as much as you claim it is. Is it often mentioned in debate? Yes, but I think that has much more to do with the emotional significance of the event for Jews, than with a conscience strategy to exploit the event for political gain/cover.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
There are a few examples of genocide in the seven-digit death toll range. The oft-overlooked 'settling' of the Western hemisphere, and the 'taming' of it's 'savages', by most estimates, trumps them all....but these comparisons turn atrocities into competitions...that's why the "nothing compares" highlight rubbed ME the wrong way.
I think ogre was being provocative (read: trolling) by highlighting that line...he knew full well he'd be called on it.
Does anyone believe we won't hear from ogre again in this thread, or what he meant by supporting that statement?
...
The guy is just stiring the pot...
...
I don't think anyone believes this is a competition, other that the most dim-witted amongst us... or that anyone believes other genocides are lessened. But, when you mention the term, 'Genocide'... the Holocaust always pops to the forefront. Why is that?
And when I say it was so industrial... I meant it was so nonchalant... indifferent... almost like a place of employment. Yeah, getting chased down and macheted is horrific... but, the hatred is clearly visible. The hatred in the holocaust wasn't as clearly visable... and more like processing raw materials or leather goods.
...
Finally, there is a huge difference between saying there were worse genocides in Man's history... and denying that the Holocaust never occurred. Which is the basis of this thread.
umm.... sorry, is there another way to interpret "nothing else compares to the Holocaust" ??
Is it really surprising that the instances of holocaust denial by Iranian leaders get more media attention than when some random schmuck denies the holocaust? To begin with, Ahmadinejad is the leader OF AN ENTIRE F-ING COUNTRY!
That's fine, except I'm not talking about random schmucks, I'm talking about other leaders of entire f-ing countries.... and there are many cases of this; Anwar Sadat who made peace with Israel was a notorious anti-semite, even after he made peace. There are several other similar cases when it comes to different idiot arab journalists who politically serve Israel's purpose but are known anti-semites. the current mubarak regime in egypt is pretty anti-semitic as well, in fact there was a famous article where netanyahu even says to ignore anti-semitism in egypt because of their important political role (in issues like gaza, etc)...
Also, he's said publicly that he seeks the destruction of Israel (you know, the state of the people targeted by the holocaust, which he denies happened), and he's in the process of building illegal nuclear weapons. As Stephen Colbert put it so eloquently the other day (read with loads of sarcasm) "yeah, why would the Israelis be paranoid about a guy who says he want's to kill them building nuclear weapons?"
Well I disagree with Colbert; I don't think there is enough to justify that Ahmadinejad wants to, or even has the capabilities, to kill Israelis. On the other hand, Israel has been the one threatening Iran, and they have a history of targeting and bombing many, many countries in the region, so..........
Anyways, I don't think that the holocaust is used to justify political actions nearly as much as you claim it is. Is it often mentioned in debate? Yes, but I think that has much more to do with the emotional significance of the event for Jews, than with a conscience strategy to exploit the event for political gain/cover.
that's fine, I don't intend on arguing this any further, especially because I think there has been excellent scholarship done on this topic already if anyone is interested (see: Norman Finkelstein - The Holocaust Industry)
Well, over here in Sweden, and basically the rest of Scandinavia, and I know thats the way it is in many other countrys too. Seriously, doesnt muslims in U.S have to take lots of prejudice to? Because of the whole terror thing?!?
"No one blames the muslims for anything"!! Seriously, i dont know excactly how things are on cuba, but over here the muslims are blamed for everything between terrorism, killing our culture, raping our women, taking our jobs and fillin up our jails. if guilty or not, they have to deal with a lots of prejudice.
this is facts and does not by any means reflect my opinion.
I'm not trying to be funny but where is "over here"? There are people from all over the world on this board. In England we don't blame Muslims for everything. The Prime Minister gets that accolade.
Well, over here in Sweden, and basically the rest of Scandinavia, and I know thats the way it is in many other countrys too. Seriously, doesnt muslims in U.S have to take lots of prejudice to? Because of the whole terror thing?!?
"No one blames the muslims for anything"!! Seriously, i dont know excactly how things are on cuba, but over here the muslims are blamed for everything between terrorism, killing our culture, raping our women, taking our jobs and fillin up our jails. if guilty or not, they have to deal with a lots of prejudice.
this is facts and does not by any means reflect my opinion.
I'm not trying to be funny but where is "over here"? There are people from all over the world on this board. In England we don't blame Muslims for everything. The Prime Minister gets that accolade.
Shows: 6.27.08 Hartford, CT/5.15.10 Hartford, CT/6.18.2011 Hartford, CT (EV Solo)/10.19.13 Brooklyn/10.25.13 Hartford
"Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
Fidel Castro tells Ahmadinejad: Stop denying the holocaust
'The Jews have lived an existence that is much harder than ours. There is nothing that compares to the Holocaust,' former Cuban leader tells U.S. journal The Atlantic.
By Natasha Mozgovaya and Haaretz Service
Tags: Israel news Jewish World anti-Semitism Iran Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
Cuba's former leader Fidel Castro has urged Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to stop slandering the Jews, according to an article published on the U.S. website The Atlantic on Tuesday.
The ageing revolutionary devoted much of a five-hour conversation to the issue of anti-Semitism, wrote Jeffrey Goldberg, who interviewed Castro in the Cuban capital Havana.
Fidel Castro
Photo by: AP
Castro told The Atlantic that the Iranian government should understand the consequences anti-Semitism.
"This went on for maybe two thousand years," he said. "I don't think anyone has been slandered more than the Jews. I would say much more than the Muslims. They have been slandered much more than the Muslims because they are blamed and slandered for everything. No one blames the Muslims for anything."
He added: "The Jews have lived an existence that is much harder than ours. There is nothing that compares to the Holocaust."
Asked by Goldberg if he would repeat his comments to Ahmadinejad, Castro said. "I am saying this so you can communicate it."
Following the interview, Goldberg spoke with Haaretz about his impression of the thinking behind Castro's comments.
"I think he [Castro] realizes he's gone too far in certain criticisms of Israel," Goldberg said.
"I think he wants to be a player in this issue; and I think he's genuinely offended by Holocaust denial."
Ahmadinejad has publicy called the Holocaust "a myth", claiming Jews exaggerated the Nazi genocide to win sympathy from European governemnts.
Great, now can you point out where Ahmadinejad denied the holocaust? Thanks.
Or is this just another lie like the one which claims Ahmadinejad wants Israel wiped off the map?
Fidel Castro tells Ahmadinejad: Stop denying the holocaust
'The Jews have lived an existence that is much harder than ours. There is nothing that compares to the Holocaust,' former Cuban leader tells U.S. journal The Atlantic.
By Natasha Mozgovaya and Haaretz Service
Tags: Israel news Jewish World anti-Semitism Iran Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
Cuba's former leader Fidel Castro has urged Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to stop slandering the Jews, according to an article published on the U.S. website The Atlantic on Tuesday.
The ageing revolutionary devoted much of a five-hour conversation to the issue of anti-Semitism, wrote Jeffrey Goldberg, who interviewed Castro in the Cuban capital Havana.
Fidel Castro
Photo by: AP
Castro told The Atlantic that the Iranian government should understand the consequences anti-Semitism.
"This went on for maybe two thousand years," he said. "I don't think anyone has been slandered more than the Jews. I would say much more than the Muslims. They have been slandered much more than the Muslims because they are blamed and slandered for everything. No one blames the Muslims for anything."
He added: "The Jews have lived an existence that is much harder than ours. There is nothing that compares to the Holocaust."
Asked by Goldberg if he would repeat his comments to Ahmadinejad, Castro said. "I am saying this so you can communicate it."
Following the interview, Goldberg spoke with Haaretz about his impression of the thinking behind Castro's comments.
"I think he [Castro] realizes he's gone too far in certain criticisms of Israel," Goldberg said.
"I think he wants to be a player in this issue; and I think he's genuinely offended by Holocaust denial."
Ahmadinejad has publicy called the Holocaust "a myth", claiming Jews exaggerated the Nazi genocide to win sympathy from European governemnts.
Great, now can you point out where Ahmadinejad denied the holocaust? Thanks.
Or is this just another lie like the one which claims Ahmadinejad wants Israel wiped off the map?
Fidel Castro tells Ahmadinejad: Stop denying the holocaust
'The Jews have lived an existence that is much harder than ours. There is nothing that compares to the Holocaust,' former Cuban leader tells U.S. journal The Atlantic.
By Natasha Mozgovaya and Haaretz Service
Tags: Israel news Jewish World anti-Semitism Iran Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
Cuba's former leader Fidel Castro has urged Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to stop slandering the Jews, according to an article published on the U.S. website The Atlantic on Tuesday.
The ageing revolutionary devoted much of a five-hour conversation to the issue of anti-Semitism, wrote Jeffrey Goldberg, who interviewed Castro in the Cuban capital Havana.
Fidel Castro
Photo by: AP
Castro told The Atlantic that the Iranian government should understand the consequences anti-Semitism.
"This went on for maybe two thousand years," he said. "I don't think anyone has been slandered more than the Jews. I would say much more than the Muslims. They have been slandered much more than the Muslims because they are blamed and slandered for everything. No one blames the Muslims for anything."
He added: "The Jews have lived an existence that is much harder than ours. There is nothing that compares to the Holocaust."
Asked by Goldberg if he would repeat his comments to Ahmadinejad, Castro said. "I am saying this so you can communicate it."
Following the interview, Goldberg spoke with Haaretz about his impression of the thinking behind Castro's comments.
"I think he [Castro] realizes he's gone too far in certain criticisms of Israel," Goldberg said.
"I think he wants to be a player in this issue; and I think he's genuinely offended by Holocaust denial."
Ahmadinejad has publicy called the Holocaust "a myth", claiming Jews exaggerated the Nazi genocide to win sympathy from European governemnts.
Great, now can you point out where Ahmadinejad denied the holocaust? Thanks.
Or is this just another lie like the one which claims Ahmadinejad wants Israel wiped off the map?
"then he called for Israel to be wiped off the map"
that one line discredits the entire article....not that i'm suggesting Ahmadinejad didn't deny the holocaust, he may have done so (i've still seen no evidence), but nothing in this article can be trusted after that misquote in the last line. the "wiped off the map" translation to what he actually said is much less sinister than what has been widely reported in western press. the literal translation was an attack on the Israeli government, not the state itself, and that's a crucial distinction. he's not calling for the destruction of Israel, he's calling for an end to a racist regime.
'Many news sources repeated the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting statement as though Ahmadinejad had demanded that "Israel must be wiped off the map",[5][6] an English idiom which means to "cause a place to stop existing",[7] or to "obliterate totally",[8] or "destroy completely".[9] News sources currently continue to repeat this claim.[10]
Ahmadinejad's phrase was " بايد از صفحه روزگار محو شود " according to the text published on the President's Office's website, and was a quote of Ayatollah Khomeini.[11]
The translation presented by IRNA has been challenged by Arash Norouzi, who says the statement "wiped off the map" was never made and that Ahmadinejad did not refer to the nation or land mass of Israel, but to the "regime occupying Jerusalem". Norouzi translated the original Persian to English, word for word, with the result, "the Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time."[12] Juan Cole, a University of Michigan Professor of Modern Middle East and South Asian History, agrees that Ahmadinejad's statement should be translated as, "the Imam said that this regime occupying Jerusalem (een rezhim-e eshghalgar-e qods) must [vanish from] the page of time (bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad).[13]
The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) translates the phrase similarly, as "be eliminated from the pages of history."[14]
According to Cole, "Ahmadinejad did not say he was going to 'wipe Israel off the map' because no such idiom exists in Persian". Instead, "He did say he hoped its regime, i.e., a Jewish-Zionist state occupying Jerusalem, would collapse."[15]
On June 2, 2006 The Guardian columnist and foreign correspondent Jonathan Steele published an article based on this line of reasoning.[16]
Sources within the Iranian government have also denied that Ahmadinejad issued any sort of threat.[17][18][19][20] On 20 February 2006, Iran's foreign minister denied that Tehran wanted to see Israel "wiped off the map," saying Ahmadinejad had been misunderstood. "Nobody can remove a country from the map. This is a misunderstanding in Europe of what our president mentioned," Manouchehr Mottaki told a news conference, speaking in English, after addressing the European Parliament. "How is it possible to remove a country from the map? He is talking about the regime. We do not recognize legally this regime," he said.[21][22][23]
Shiraz Dossa, a professor of Political Science at St. Francis Xavier University in Nova Scotia, Canada who presented a paper at the International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust conference in Iran, believes the text is a mistranslation.[24]
Ahmadinejad was quoting the Ayatollah Khomeini in the specific speech under discussion: what he said was that "the occupation regime over Jerusalem should vanish from the page of time." No state action is envisaged in this lament; it denotes a spiritual wish, whereas the erroneous translation—"wipe Israel off the map"—suggests a military threat. There is a huge chasm between the correct and the incorrect translations. The notion that Iran can "wipe out" U.S.-backed, nuclear-armed Israel is ludicrous.[25][26][27]
In a September 2006 with NBC Nightly News Anchor Brian Williams, Ahmadinejad clarified his remarks, saying that when he called the Holocaust a myth he was merely trying to communicate that it was not just Jews that died, but millions of people and he wants to know why it is the Palestinian people that have to pay for the Nazis' slaughter of the Jewish people.[78]
'In the second World War, over 60 million people lost their lives. They were all human beings. Why is it that only a select group of those who were killed have become so prominent and important? Do you think that the 60 million who lost their lives were all at the result of warfare alone? There were two million that were part of the military at the time, perhaps altogether, 50 million civilians with no roles in the war — Christians, Muslims. They were all killed. The second and more important question that I raised was, if this event happened, and if it is a historical event, then we should allow everyone to research it and study it. The more research and studies are done, the clearer the issue gets. We still leave open to further studies absolute knowledge of science or math. Historical events are always subject to revisions, and reviews and studies. We're still revising our thoughts about what happened over thousands of years ago. Why is it that researchers are jailed? Why is researching this issue prohibitited? Where as we can openly question God, the prophet, concepts such as freedom and democracy? And the third question that I raised in this regard: assuming that this happened, where did it happen? Did the Palestinian people have anything to do with it? Why should the Palestinians pay for it now? Five million displaced Palestinian people is what I'm talking about. Over 60 years of living under terror. Losing the lives of thousands of dear ones. And homes that are destroyed on a daily basis over people's heads. You might argue that the Jews have the right to have a government. We're not against that. But where? At a place where their people were — several people will vote for them, and where they can govern.'
In 2003 did you believe Bush and Blair when they told you that Iraq was a threat to the world and that they possessed weapons of mass destruction that could land in our cities in 45 minutes?
"The second and more important question that I raised was, if this event happened, and if it is a historical event, then we should allow everyone to research it and study it. The more research and studies are done, the clearer the issue gets. We still leave open to further studies absolute knowledge of science or math. Historical events are always subject to revisions, and reviews and studies. We're still revising our thoughts about what happened over thousands of years ago. Why is it that researchers are jailed? Why is researching this issue prohibitited? Where as we can openly question God, the prophet, concepts such as freedom and democracy? And the third question that I raised in this regard: assuming that this happened, where did it happen?"
We don't need to "assume" that the holocaust happened. We don't need to ask "if" the holocaust happened. It DID happen, it IS a historical event. How is this not holocaust denial?!
As for research, there's a ton of it. It isn't prohibited in any way. There are countries that have laws against holocaust denial, but the only "researchers" who are penalized under those laws are people who's research consists of holocaust denial dressed up in psuedo-scholarship.
Dude, I know you hate Israel a lot, but when you're defending holocaust denial you're really stooping very, very low.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
"The second and more important question that I raised was, if this event happened, and if it is a historical event, then we should allow everyone to research it and study it. The more research and studies are done, the clearer the issue gets. We still leave open to further studies absolute knowledge of science or math. Historical events are always subject to revisions, and reviews and studies. We're still revising our thoughts about what happened over thousands of years ago. Why is it that researchers are jailed? Why is researching this issue prohibitited? Where as we can openly question God, the prophet, concepts such as freedom and democracy? And the third question that I raised in this regard: assuming that this happened, where did it happen?"
We don't need to "assume" that the holocaust happened. We don't need to ask "if" the holocaust happened. It DID happen, it IS a historical event. How is this not holocaust denial?!
As for research, there's a ton of it. It isn't prohibited in any way. There are countries that have laws against holocaust denial, but the only "researchers" who are penalized under those laws are people who's research consists of holocaust denial dressed up in psuedo-scholarship.
Dude, I know you hate Israel a lot, but when you're defending holocaust denial you're really stooping very, very low.
Firstly, he doesn't deny the holocaust happened. Any honest person who reads the above paragraph can see that, and your selective highlighting doesn't change it.
Secondly, why do you suppose that someone who is opposed to the Israeli occupation hates Israel?
Thirdly, how come you get free rein to accuse anyone and everyone of being anti-semitic, a holocaust denier e.t.c, e.t.c, and yet we all have to bend over backwards to avoid causing you any offence?
Your persistant accusations of racism on this message board have grown very thin. Where's your warning from the moderators?
I think you hate Israel because in my opinion the your tone when discussing the subject is hateful. I have strong opinions on a lot of political subjects, but the tenor of your comments when it comes to Israel, at least in my opinion, goes well beyond strong opinion into outright hatred. But that's just my read.
I don't get free reign, and I wouldn't claim to have it. The only person I have ever called a holocaust denier on this forum is the president of Iran, and only because he has gone on record denying the holocaust. As for antisemitism, I don't throw the charge around lightly, despite what you seem to think. And forgive me, but when it comes to accusations of antisemitism I hardly think that the issue of greatest importance is whether the accused is offended by the charge [and no, that was not a back-handed accusation of antisemitism, in case you are too enraged to read carefully].
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
...There are countries that have laws against holocaust denial, but the only "researchers" who are penalized under those laws are people who's research consists of holocaust denial dressed up in psuedo-scholarship.
i think its kinda weird some countries have a law against holocaust denial. what do you think yosi?
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I have no problem with it. Many countries have laws proscribing hate speech, including holocaust denial, and genocide denial more broadly. As an American I'm used to the broader understanding of free speech, but I have no real issues with countries that have a slightly more limited view on the matter, at least in this regard.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
I have no problem with it. Many countries have laws proscribing hate speech, including holocaust denial, and genocide denial more broadly. As an American I'm used to the broader understanding of free speech, but I have no real issues with countries that have a slightly more limited view on the matter, at least in this regard.
as an american you should come on down here.. wed give you a run for your money in the free speech stakes.
anyhoo... so you see all genocide denial as hate speech??
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I think you hate Israel because in my opinion the your tone when discussing the subject is hateful.
I think It's perfectly reasonable to feel anger when discussing ethnic cleansing with people who support and encourage it.
Then again, whether I'm angry, calm as a Hindu Cow, or laughing like a hyena on acid, is beside the point.
Though I realise it would be in your best interest for any discussion about the Israeli occupation to be diverted to one about people's emotions and personalities instead, as there's only so much wriggling, dishonest subterfuge an Israel apologist can indulge in before the facts begin to gnaw on him.
Like I said, I go in for the broadest American definition of free speech. I just don't particularly have any problems with, say, Germany restricting hate speech.
And yeah, I would consider genocide denial hate speech (and if you're trying to bait me with the poor history of certain Jewish groups regarding the Armenians, I'll beat you to the punch; the Armenian genocide was an atrocity, and no one should stay silent on the matter because of narrow political motivations. To do so is disgusting.).
Byrnzie, you make my arguments for me. Thank you.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
Like I said, I go in for the broadest American definition of free speech. I just don't particularly have any problems with, say, Germany restricting hate speech.
And yeah, I would consider genocide denial hate speech (and if you're trying to bait me with the poor history of certain Jewish groups regarding the Armenians, I'll beat you to the punch; the Armenian genocide was an atrocity, and no one should stay silent on the matter because of narrow political motivations. To do so is disgusting.).
Byrnzie, you make my arguments for me. Thank you.
nope no baiting yosi.. just asking questions in order to better understand.
yeah im not really surprised germany restricts hate speech considering...
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Like I said, I go in for the broadest American definition of free speech. I just don't particularly have any problems with, say, Germany restricting hate speech.
that's where it starts tho.
if you allow your government, in their quest to silence hate speech, to silence people and determine if what they're saying isn't valid, you have opened the door for them to apply that to other areas as well.
the second you give your gov't that power, you have no freedom of speech.
where were the dissenters in 1940 germany when hitler decided to open the concentration camps? they were being silenced by their government, allowed by people who thought, "you know, maybe the government knows what's best, maybe we should listen"
authority by nature is not moral. that takes people. institutions are corrupt, or will corrupt eventually. modern day germany 50 years from now can decide what people say, and there is something very wrong with that. mistakes of history tend to be repeated....and by not allowing free speech tehy are dangerously in line with allowing those atrocities to happen again.
Ok, my bad. I get a bit defensive on these boards. I think you can look to Byrnzie to see why.
well byrnzie is tenaciously passionate ill give him that. and i understand that he sees what israel is doing to the palestinians as heinous in the extreme. many people do. and like many people he doesnt give an inch to the apologists. many people dont. and that was a general statement. and i understand as a jew you may take it somewhat personally.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Well, I take it personally because he directs it at me personally, by name. And I don't consider myself an "apologist" (although I suppose there isn't much I can do to convince some people here). I have my disagreements with many here, who I think have a very lop-sided view of the world. If that makes me an "apologist" in their eyes I don't much care. I value the opinions of many people. None of them are on this board.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
Comments
Is it really surprising that the instances of holocaust denial by Iranian leaders get more media attention than when some random schmuck denies the holocaust? To begin with, Ahmadinejad is the leader OF AN ENTIRE F-ING COUNTRY! Also, he's said publicly that he seeks the destruction of Israel (you know, the state of the people targeted by the holocaust, which he denies happened), and he's in the process of building illegal nuclear weapons. As Stephen Colbert put it so eloquently the other day (read with loads of sarcasm) "yeah, why would the Israelis be paranoid about a guy who says he want's to kill them building nuclear weapons?" Anyways, I don't think that the holocaust is used to justify political actions nearly as much as you claim it is. Is it often mentioned in debate? Yes, but I think that has much more to do with the emotional significance of the event for Jews, than with a conscience strategy to exploit the event for political gain/cover.
How uncanny.... just like Israel. Though Israel is not 'in the process' but 'has'.
Yes... by considering the source... some guy who is quoting Fidel Castro.
Hail, Hail!!!
"Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
Great, now can you point out where Ahmadinejad denied the holocaust? Thanks.
Or is this just another lie like the one which claims Ahmadinejad wants Israel wiped off the map?
http://www.france24.com/en/20090919-wes ... i-semitism well there is this
see, the last line of that article,
"then he called for Israel to be wiped off the map"
that one line discredits the entire article....not that i'm suggesting Ahmadinejad didn't deny the holocaust, he may have done so (i've still seen no evidence), but nothing in this article can be trusted after that misquote in the last line. the "wiped off the map" translation to what he actually said is much less sinister than what has been widely reported in western press. the literal translation was an attack on the Israeli government, not the state itself, and that's a crucial distinction. he's not calling for the destruction of Israel, he's calling for an end to a racist regime.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ah ... and_Israel
'Many news sources repeated the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting statement as though Ahmadinejad had demanded that "Israel must be wiped off the map",[5][6] an English idiom which means to "cause a place to stop existing",[7] or to "obliterate totally",[8] or "destroy completely".[9] News sources currently continue to repeat this claim.[10]
Ahmadinejad's phrase was " بايد از صفحه روزگار محو شود " according to the text published on the President's Office's website, and was a quote of Ayatollah Khomeini.[11]
The translation presented by IRNA has been challenged by Arash Norouzi, who says the statement "wiped off the map" was never made and that Ahmadinejad did not refer to the nation or land mass of Israel, but to the "regime occupying Jerusalem". Norouzi translated the original Persian to English, word for word, with the result, "the Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time."[12] Juan Cole, a University of Michigan Professor of Modern Middle East and South Asian History, agrees that Ahmadinejad's statement should be translated as, "the Imam said that this regime occupying Jerusalem (een rezhim-e eshghalgar-e qods) must [vanish from] the page of time (bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad).[13]
The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) translates the phrase similarly, as "be eliminated from the pages of history."[14]
According to Cole, "Ahmadinejad did not say he was going to 'wipe Israel off the map' because no such idiom exists in Persian". Instead, "He did say he hoped its regime, i.e., a Jewish-Zionist state occupying Jerusalem, would collapse."[15]
On June 2, 2006 The Guardian columnist and foreign correspondent Jonathan Steele published an article based on this line of reasoning.[16]
Sources within the Iranian government have also denied that Ahmadinejad issued any sort of threat.[17][18][19][20] On 20 February 2006, Iran's foreign minister denied that Tehran wanted to see Israel "wiped off the map," saying Ahmadinejad had been misunderstood. "Nobody can remove a country from the map. This is a misunderstanding in Europe of what our president mentioned," Manouchehr Mottaki told a news conference, speaking in English, after addressing the European Parliament. "How is it possible to remove a country from the map? He is talking about the regime. We do not recognize legally this regime," he said.[21][22][23]
Shiraz Dossa, a professor of Political Science at St. Francis Xavier University in Nova Scotia, Canada who presented a paper at the International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust conference in Iran, believes the text is a mistranslation.[24]
Ahmadinejad was quoting the Ayatollah Khomeini in the specific speech under discussion: what he said was that "the occupation regime over Jerusalem should vanish from the page of time." No state action is envisaged in this lament; it denotes a spiritual wish, whereas the erroneous translation—"wipe Israel off the map"—suggests a military threat. There is a huge chasm between the correct and the incorrect translations. The notion that Iran can "wipe out" U.S.-backed, nuclear-armed Israel is ludicrous.[25][26][27]
He didn't deny the holocaust:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ah ... and_Israel
In a September 2006 with NBC Nightly News Anchor Brian Williams, Ahmadinejad clarified his remarks, saying that when he called the Holocaust a myth he was merely trying to communicate that it was not just Jews that died, but millions of people and he wants to know why it is the Palestinian people that have to pay for the Nazis' slaughter of the Jewish people.[78]
'In the second World War, over 60 million people lost their lives. They were all human beings. Why is it that only a select group of those who were killed have become so prominent and important? Do you think that the 60 million who lost their lives were all at the result of warfare alone? There were two million that were part of the military at the time, perhaps altogether, 50 million civilians with no roles in the war — Christians, Muslims. They were all killed. The second and more important question that I raised was, if this event happened, and if it is a historical event, then we should allow everyone to research it and study it. The more research and studies are done, the clearer the issue gets. We still leave open to further studies absolute knowledge of science or math. Historical events are always subject to revisions, and reviews and studies. We're still revising our thoughts about what happened over thousands of years ago. Why is it that researchers are jailed? Why is researching this issue prohibitited? Where as we can openly question God, the prophet, concepts such as freedom and democracy? And the third question that I raised in this regard: assuming that this happened, where did it happen? Did the Palestinian people have anything to do with it? Why should the Palestinians pay for it now? Five million displaced Palestinian people is what I'm talking about. Over 60 years of living under terror. Losing the lives of thousands of dear ones. And homes that are destroyed on a daily basis over people's heads. You might argue that the Jews have the right to have a government. We're not against that. But where? At a place where their people were — several people will vote for them, and where they can govern.'
In 2003 did you believe Bush and Blair when they told you that Iraq was a threat to the world and that they possessed weapons of mass destruction that could land in our cities in 45 minutes?
"The second and more important question that I raised was, if this event happened, and if it is a historical event, then we should allow everyone to research it and study it. The more research and studies are done, the clearer the issue gets. We still leave open to further studies absolute knowledge of science or math. Historical events are always subject to revisions, and reviews and studies. We're still revising our thoughts about what happened over thousands of years ago. Why is it that researchers are jailed? Why is researching this issue prohibitited? Where as we can openly question God, the prophet, concepts such as freedom and democracy? And the third question that I raised in this regard: assuming that this happened, where did it happen?"
We don't need to "assume" that the holocaust happened. We don't need to ask "if" the holocaust happened. It DID happen, it IS a historical event. How is this not holocaust denial?!
As for research, there's a ton of it. It isn't prohibited in any way. There are countries that have laws against holocaust denial, but the only "researchers" who are penalized under those laws are people who's research consists of holocaust denial dressed up in psuedo-scholarship.
Dude, I know you hate Israel a lot, but when you're defending holocaust denial you're really stooping very, very low.
Firstly, he doesn't deny the holocaust happened. Any honest person who reads the above paragraph can see that, and your selective highlighting doesn't change it.
Secondly, why do you suppose that someone who is opposed to the Israeli occupation hates Israel?
Thirdly, how come you get free rein to accuse anyone and everyone of being anti-semitic, a holocaust denier e.t.c, e.t.c, and yet we all have to bend over backwards to avoid causing you any offence?
Your persistant accusations of racism on this message board have grown very thin. Where's your warning from the moderators?
I don't get free reign, and I wouldn't claim to have it. The only person I have ever called a holocaust denier on this forum is the president of Iran, and only because he has gone on record denying the holocaust. As for antisemitism, I don't throw the charge around lightly, despite what you seem to think. And forgive me, but when it comes to accusations of antisemitism I hardly think that the issue of greatest importance is whether the accused is offended by the charge [and no, that was not a back-handed accusation of antisemitism, in case you are too enraged to read carefully].
i think its kinda weird some countries have a law against holocaust denial. what do you think yosi?
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
if you support free speech, you support the worst among us, their right to say whatever they wish. or you don't support free speech.
its when you allow your gov't to decide what is acceptable speech that things like the jewish holocaust happen in the first place.
you must allow dissent, precisely to prevent future holocausts.
as an american you should come on down here.. wed give you a run for your money in the free speech stakes.
anyhoo... so you see all genocide denial as hate speech??
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I think It's perfectly reasonable to feel anger when discussing ethnic cleansing with people who support and encourage it.
Then again, whether I'm angry, calm as a Hindu Cow, or laughing like a hyena on acid, is beside the point.
Though I realise it would be in your best interest for any discussion about the Israeli occupation to be diverted to one about people's emotions and personalities instead, as there's only so much wriggling, dishonest subterfuge an Israel apologist can indulge in before the facts begin to gnaw on him.
And yeah, I would consider genocide denial hate speech (and if you're trying to bait me with the poor history of certain Jewish groups regarding the Armenians, I'll beat you to the punch; the Armenian genocide was an atrocity, and no one should stay silent on the matter because of narrow political motivations. To do so is disgusting.).
Byrnzie, you make my arguments for me. Thank you.
thats quite a range youve got there steve.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
nope no baiting yosi.. just asking questions in order to better understand.
yeah im not really surprised germany restricts hate speech considering...
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
that's where it starts tho.
if you allow your government, in their quest to silence hate speech, to silence people and determine if what they're saying isn't valid, you have opened the door for them to apply that to other areas as well.
the second you give your gov't that power, you have no freedom of speech.
where were the dissenters in 1940 germany when hitler decided to open the concentration camps? they were being silenced by their government, allowed by people who thought, "you know, maybe the government knows what's best, maybe we should listen"
authority by nature is not moral. that takes people. institutions are corrupt, or will corrupt eventually. modern day germany 50 years from now can decide what people say, and there is something very wrong with that. mistakes of history tend to be repeated....and by not allowing free speech tehy are dangerously in line with allowing those atrocities to happen again.
well byrnzie is tenaciously passionate ill give him that. and i understand that he sees what israel is doing to the palestinians as heinous in the extreme. many people do. and like many people he doesnt give an inch to the apologists. many people dont. and that was a general statement. and i understand as a jew you may take it somewhat personally.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
That says it all. Why bother on the board then? Not trying to pick a fight - just wondering.