An Interesting angle on the Columbine thing

my2hands

spiral out wrote:

Come on dying from disease really is not the same as people being led to a gas chamber everyday.

One is wilful intent the other is not. So if indeed millions were not gassed then i think it is important.

wow... you have to be fucking kidding?

Byrnzie

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

It does cast light on identifying what kind of people we are talking about when it comes to what happened.

I think it matters to understand it as thoroughly and truthfully as possible.

I think thats is all anyone can ask.

'In presenting his ruling, Mr. Justice Gray concluded (Paragraph 13.167) that he found the following claims against Irving to be 'substantially true':

“ Irving has for his own ideological reasons persistently and deliberately misrepresented and manipulated historical evidence; that for the same reasons he has portrayed Hitler in an unwarrantedly favourable light, principally in relation to his attitude towards and responsibility for the treatment of the Jews; that he is an active Holocaust denier; that he is anti-Semitic and racist, and that he associates with right-wing extremists who promote neo-Nazism. ”

Irving lost subsequent attempts at appeal, the appeal finally being rejected by Lord Justice Sedley....

In a six-page essay in The New York Review of Books, Gordon A. Craig, a leading scholar of German history at Stanford University, noted Irving's claims that the Holocaust never took place and that Auschwitz was merely "a labor camp with an unfortunately high death rate".[45] Though "such obtuse and quickly discredited views" may be "offensive to large numbers of people", Craig argued that Irving's work is "the best study we have of the German side of the Second World War" and that "we dare not" disregard his views. Craig called Irving a "useful irritant”; a devil's advocate historian who promoted what Craig considered to be a twisted and wrong-headed view of history, with a great deal of élan, but his advocacy of these views forced historians to make a fruitful epistemological examination about the current state of knowledge about the Third Reich.'

in_hiding79

my2hands wrote:

your kidding right?


you have a fixation on jews and israel... it is concerning

Why do I think of Cartman???

in_hiding79

Cosmo wrote:

...
No... Harris and Klebold did it because they were anti-social, psycho gun nutz. And if there is anyone outside of them to blame... it is possible that the kids they targeted were partly responsible if they picked on these two in school. It is NOT blamng the victims... if the victims played a vital part in the eventual outcome... the same way I hold kids who taunt fucking wild tigers in a zoo partially responsible when the fucking tiger hops the wall and bites the shit out of them.
Sorry... not Jews to blame in either case. Columbine... all blame lies with the shooters. S.F. Zoo... with the tools who were stupid enough to rile a 600 pound wild cat.

TRUE

TRUE

Collin

Cosmo wrote:

...
I get what you're saying... but, let's suppose that 60 years from now... future revisionists look back at September 11, 2001 and say...
"Well, only 800 people died as a direct cause of the al Qaeda members. That is, 800 people died from the direct cause of the planes, crashing into the buildings.
Some people actually killed themselves by jumping out the windows... and fire fighters and police officers... who weren't there when the plance actually crashed into the buildings, rather, they arrived afterwards and died rushing into the building or were crushed when the buildings collapsed."
...
Even if that were true... al Qaeda and those hi-jackers need to be held responsible for all 2,900 of those lives they took. And the attacks of September 11, 2001 would remain as a terrible act that demonstrates the horrible nature Man can reveal himself to be... right?

I agree with you. Don't get me wrong. People wouldn't have normally jumped. Fire fighters and police officers would not have been killed if the hi-jackers hadn't flown into the buildings. Of course the responsibility remains with the perpetrators. Of course it remains a heinous act. That doesn't change at all.

But if that were really true, why wouldn't you say it? Why wouldn't you put that in history books?

I'm not even saying the prisoners in the nazi camps weren't gassed. I haven't looked at the evidence yet, only my history school books and documentaries.

The records have only been made public to researcher and historians recently. Are all these historians and researchers people with evil revisionist agendas? Should they stop researching the files and become (or stay) complacent?

mammasan

Collin wrote:

My agenda? What are you talking about?

Anyway, I've heard 4 million were killed and I've heard 6 million were killed. That's a huge difference. But does the difference matter? Not really. But why would you not want to give the most accurate number?

You say the consensus is the number was between 5.1 and 5.9 million. I'd say that's very reasonable, we'll never know the exact number.

What I'm trying to say is, why wouldn't we want to present accurate information? If the nazis let more than half starve to death, why say they gassed most of them (this is just an example, not something I believe)?

Maybe you're satisfied with only knowing half of the story (that they were killed). But I'm also interested in how they were killed. I'm interested in history. I think it's relevant information, and that doesn't mean I have some agenda.

I wasn't referring to you, but the agenda of people like David Cole and David Irving. While most people may try to find out more information to paint a more accurate picture of the Holocaust for histories sake, just so future generation will have a better understand of what transpired so that we may learn and hopefully prevent such tragedies from happening. These men do so to minimalize the Holocaust.

Collin

mammasan wrote:

I wasn't referring to you, but the agenda of people like David Cole and David Irving. While most people may try to find out more information to paint a more accurate picture of the Holocaust for histories sake, just so future generation will have a better understand of what transpired so that we may learn and hopefully prevent such tragedies from happening. These men do so to minimalize the Holocaust.

Ok, I agree with that.

Heineken Helen

hmm... I'm quite a conspiracy theorist... most of my theories and most conspiracy theories in general stem from a distrust of government and a presumption that they place money and their own personal needs before everything and that they're all in it together somehow. With that in mind, I fail to see the logic in exaggerating the holocaust... I really can't see how it benefits anyone because it's pretty obvious a significant number of people died by disgusting means... why would they need to double or even triple the figure? Will people say 'ahhh... it was only 3 million... sure that's nothing'? Although they may well I suppose!

catefrances

Heineken Helen wrote:

hmm... I'm quite a conspiracy theorist... most of my theories and most conspiracy theories in general stem from a distrust of government and a presumption that they place money and their own personal needs before everything and that they're all in it together somehow. With that in mind, I fail to see the logic in exaggerating the holocaust... I really can't see how it benefits anyone because it's pretty obvious a significant number of people died by disgusting means... why would they need to double or even triple the figure? Will people say 'ahhh... it was only 3 million... sure that's nothing'? Although they may well I suppose!

my problem with the shoah is not whether or not the numbers were fudged, but that fact that europe, seemed fine with this happening in their midst. perhaps im being harsh, but there is NO WAY you will ever convince me that hitler did what he did for so long and NO FUCKER knew what he was doing. but i guess it was ok, yeah? cause afterall twas only jews(for the most part) wasnt it and theyre just not like us, right?

Heineken Helen

catefrances wrote:

my problem with the shoah is not whether or not the numbers were fudged, but that fact that europe, seemed fine with this happening in their midst. perhaps im being harsh, but there is NO WAY you will ever convince me that hitler did what he did for so long and NO FUCKER knew what he was doing. but i guess it was ok, yeah? cause afterall twas only jews(for the most part) wasnt it and theyre just not like us, right?

I really have no idea... twas long before my time... and there was no internet or anything back then... and Ireland had nothing to do with the whole thing as we had our own things to be dealing with . But then there are things in the modern day WITH all this knowledge like Rwanda or Sudan or wherever it will be next... that we ALL let happen :( . I guess people in general really couldn't give a fuck long as they're not there.

I highly doubt religion was a factor. As someone else pointed out, t'wasn't just jews.

Heineken Helen

catefrances wrote:

my problem with the shoah is not whether or not the numbers were fudged, but that fact that europe, seemed fine with this happening in their midst. perhaps im being harsh, but there is NO WAY you will ever convince me that hitler did what he did for so long and NO FUCKER knew what he was doing. but i guess it was ok, yeah? cause afterall twas only jews(for the most part) wasnt it and theyre just not like us, right?

Also, the only countries with the capabilities to stop him were the likes of Britain, Russia, US... he already had his foot in the other powers... and they eventually did stop him... but again, in those days... so much harder.

Besides you're arguing that with an Irish person... who helped us? We lost 3 million during our famine... albeit 100 years before that... but it still took us until the first world war to start getting some chance of freedom. And nobody gave a fuck. Apologies, but the Jews were the last people on our mind... apart from those we helped.

catefrances

Heineken Helen wrote:

I really have no idea... twas long before my time... and there was no internet or anything back then... and Ireland had nothing to do with the whole thing as we had our own things to be dealing with . But then there are things in the modern day WITH all this knowledge like Rwanda or Sudan or wherever it will be next... that we ALL let happen :( . I guess people in general really couldn't give a fuck long as they're not there.

I highly doubt religion was a factor. As someone else pointed out, t'wasn't just jews.

religion wasn't a factor how?

Heineken Helen

catefrances wrote:

religion wasn't a factor how?

Religion wasn't a factor in the rest of the world not doing something quicker. It wasn't cos they were jews... cos let's face it, it wasn't just jews Hitler was after was it?

catefrances

Heineken Helen wrote:

Also, the only countries with the capabilities to stop him were the likes of Britain, Russia, US... he already had his foot in the other powers... and they eventually did stop him... but again, in those days... so much harder.

Besides you're arguing that with an Irish person... who helped us? We lost 3 million during our famine... albeit 100 years before that... but it still took us until the first world war to start getting some chance of freedom. And nobody gave a fuck. Apologies, but the Jews were the last people on our mind... apart from those we helped.

i know youre irish helen. and theres no need to try and convince me what fucking arseholes the english were and how no one gave a shit about ireland. tis my heritage too. wasnt for the fabulous weather my family came to australia.

catefrances

Heineken Helen wrote:

Religion wasn't a factor in the rest of the world not doing something quicker. It wasn't cos they were jews... cos let's face it, it wasn't just jews Hitler was after was it?

did you see where i wrote, for the most part?
i am fully aware the jews werent the only victims of hitler. however the jews were the great evil dangled in front of the german people when a scapegoat for germany's woes was needed.

Heineken Helen

catefrances wrote:

i know youre irish helen. and theres no need to try and convince me what fucking arseholes the english were and how no one gave a shit about ireland. tis my heritage too. wasnt for the fabulous weather my family came to australia.

to be honest, coming from different point of view, one could ask what was so special about the jews that we still discuss this all around the world every day? Sure it was shit but I don't see threads and threads about the Irish famine... or about how we were treated... or any other country who's had it bad for that matter... cos there're plenty of us... it wasn't just the jews who were persecuted at any one time.

And don't get me wrong... of course it was fucking dispicable what happened... but there have been plenty of disgusting regimes since then and people don't seem to care... 'never again' my arse. Does that only apply to the Jews?

Heineken Helen

catefrances wrote:

did you see where i wrote, for the most part?
i am fully aware the jews werent the only victims of hitler. however the jews were the great evil dangled in front of the german people when a scapegoat for germany's woes was needed.

But I fail to see how you can blame this on the rest of Europe? The world was nothing like how it is today regarding information.

catefrances

Heineken Helen wrote:

to be honest, coming from different point of view, one could ask what was so special about the jews that we still discuss this all around the world every day? Sure it was shit but I don't see threads and threads about the Irish famine... or about how we were treated... or any other country who's had it bad for that matter... cos there're plenty of us... it wasn't just the jews who were persecuted at any one time.

And don't get me wrong... of course it was fucking dispicable what happened... but there have been plenty of disgusting regimes since then and people don't seem to care... 'never again' my arse. Does that only apply to the Jews?

genocide is genocide as far as im concerned. in the case of nazi germany it was the execution(pardon the pun) of said genocide that makes it 'stand out' over all the others. the objective of the shoah was a systematic culling on an entire race of people by the state. a state that everyone would hold up as advanced and intelligent, certainly not barbaric. hitler didnt succeed but it wasnt through lack of trying.

and no never again does not only apply to the jews. but my feeling on this is that the rest of the world feels so god damn guilty about what they allowed to happen that quite honestly they should never forget it.
holy shit a ship full of arms bound for zimbabwe from CHINA was stopped from entering south africa last week? how much have we heard of this story? what the fuck are china doing selling arms to zimbabwe for?

Heineken Helen

catefrances wrote:

genocide is genocide as far as im concerned. in the case of nazi germany it was the execution(pardon the pun) of said genocide that makes it 'stand out' over all the others. the objective of the shoah was a systematic culling on an entire race of people by the state. a state that everyone would hold up as advanced and intelligent, certainly not barbaric. hitler didnt succeed but it wasnt through lack of trying.

and no never again does not only apply to the jews. but my feeling on this is that the rest of the world feels so god damn guilty about what they allowed to happen that quite honestly they should never forget it.
holy shit a ship full of arms bound for zimbabwe from CHINA was stopped from entering south africa last week? how much have we heard of this story? what the fuck are china doing selling arms to zimbabwe for?

I really don't think it DOES stand out above all others... even the stories you hear from Iraq or the prisoners in Guantanomo are just as fucking dispicable... one thing guaranteed is that history will ALWAYS repeat itself... we're letting the same thing happen over and over again.

I really don't think the world DOES feel guilty about it though... or it wouldn't be happening again and again and again! Most of us have no reason to feel guilty anyway, most of us weren't around then.

catefrances

Heineken Helen wrote:

But I fail to see how you can blame this on the rest of Europe? The world was nothing like how it is today regarding information.

oh helen come on dont be so naive. do you think that no one spoke to each other. that there were no foreign nationals in germany during this time? that the leaders of other nations weren't in contact with the german government? that there wasn't any communication between jews and their families elsewhere, and others for that matter. that all the movement of whole populations and the coralling of jews in ghettoes went unnoticed?
i am not blaming europe for the shoah. that blame lays firmly at the feet of the third reich. but to think that NO ONE knew what was going on in those camps and throughout german territory is just plain ostrich talk.