Holocaust denier given suspended sentence

Absolutely I agree with you. German fascism must be entombed in the deepest hole of history. These punk kids who think they're n*zis haven't a clue the hell horror of human misery the symbols they wear represent. Sickens me physically when they prance around waving Reich flags. I say form a special counterterror unit to hunt them down internationally. All of that said, I don't ever want to live under a flag that limits my thought or speech.

Okay, but you already do.

You can't scream "Fire" in a crowded theater.

You can't make jokes about hijacking on an airplane.

You can't post kiddie porn on the internet.

They just closed down Backpage.com because the site promoted prostitution.

There are a whole lot of limits to thought and speech.

Should this be one of those limits? Maybe.

You've got me there. I am a law abiding citizen and some laws do limit my speech for reasons I accept on the basis of right and wrong. So I must switch to philosophical ethical reasoning with a smidgen of emotion to reach a conclusion on this issue. I will never question the Holocaust exactly because my grandfather rather than MSM or a history prof. educated me about its veracity.

Other side of the coin, in being a law abiding citizen I am concerned free speech or compelled speech laws could be passed in America one day for reasons other than those based on traditional universalist liberalism speaking to moral reasoning. Thus my championing of as unedited free speech as possible.

All in all we agree to differ only in the materials used for building the bridge.
 
Trying to claim, "Well, they just left them in the concentration camps and forgot to feed them" is a little insulting.
Towards the end of the war food was becoming scarce, and even the German people were struggling to find enough to eat. So I'm sure that feeding the prisoners was a low priority. ... :cool:
 
… The Holocaust happened. It was documented. Trying to claim, "Well, they just left them in the concentration camps and forgot to feed them" is a little insulting.

It is not only a little insulting - it is a totally wrong view to this what the industry of death made under the Nazis. The sentence "Arbeit macht frei" (="work makes free") was written at every concentration and extermination camp of the Nazis. At the point of history when it was the first time written (the logic of time if extremely important in case of the history of the Nazis) the people thought about "Arbeitslager" (work-camps): 'Who is criminal and learns hard work this one learns to help himself and so there will be not any longer a need for this person to continue to be criminal in the future'. Shorter: They thought work camps are better than prisons for the reintegration of criminals into society. But what thought and made the Nazis? They thought "work makes free from life" and they used hard work in combination with hunger as an instrument of industrialized mass-murder. They started to murder people with hard work and malnutrition from the very first beginning of their rulership in 1933. Now we can say everyone had to know this immediately - but had they? This had happened under the eyes of the whole world and there were nearly no protests worldwide against Hitler in the beginning. Lots of people saw coming in Hitler a new better modern world. They did not realize that this "modern" was written "murdering". And the very big problem today: The Nazis under Hitler were harmless compared with the Nazis today. Why? The people in 192x -193x - and sometimes also later - were often not able to know what was really going on. Today everyone is able to know. We have very exact detailed information about this time of history.

So to call for example the victims of Nazis "weaklings" and to say they were "criminals wich were to weak to survive" is without any doubt a crime. This is "denying of the Holocaust". Nobody was a criminal only because the Nazis arrested him - and nobody was able to survive the tortures of the Nazis.

 
Last edited:
Trying to claim, "Well, they just left them in the concentration camps and forgot to feed them" is a little insulting.
Towards the end of the war food was becoming scarce, and even the German people were struggling to find enough to eat. So I'm sure that feeding the prisoners was a low priority. ... :cool:

That's nonsense. If someone is not able to feed prisoners then he has to let them free. The Holocaust was an industrialized form of mass-murder. In the Shoa were murdered about 6 million innocent Jews - and millions of other innocent people were also exterminated. The Nazis murdered for example also about 2 million Russian prisoners of war. In general no one needs any wrong excuse for the crimes which had happened under the Nazis.
 
I apologize for not having the time to read all the posts, so forgive me if another member has already shared this information.

I have read that in France it is illegal to deny that what happened to the Armenian people in Turkey during World War One constitutes "genocide."

Some years back, a prominent historian broke that law and was given a nominal fine.
 
Those fools who would allow government the power to dictate what opinions and beliefs may be expressed without legal consequence never think about what would happen if that government came to be dominated by those who don't like the beliefs and opinions that these fools want to express.
 
Last edited:
Those fools who would allow government the power to dictate what opinions and beliefs may be expressed without legal consequence never think about what would happen if that government came to be dominated by those who don't like the beliefs and opinions that these fools want to express.

Okay, buddy... here's the thing.

Most people, like 99% are truly offended by the kind of mutant who pretends the Holocaust didn't happen.

The problem you wingnuts is you think government is some mysterious figure... it isn't.

It's us. It reflects what the people think.

And most Europeans, still being able to see the scars of what the Nazis did... really don't have any patience for an idiot who tries to claim it was all made up.
 
The more important question is why is it illegal to question anything?4
What kind of fucked up country would make questioning anything illegal?
Further more what kind of citizenswould allow this to happen?
 
Those fools who would allow government the power to dictate what opinions and beliefs may be expressed without legal consequence never think about what would happen if that government came to be dominated by those who don't like the beliefs and opinions that these fools want to express.

Frist: The genocide "holocaust" is a fact - and not an opinion or a belief.
Second: What costs it in the USA to say for example to a to a judge or a policeman "fool"? ¿Free speech?
Third: Verbal aggressions are in general able to cause in a brain the same wounds and reactions like corporality aggressions.
And in general: "Free speech" is not the same like perfidious calumny or mobbing or stalking for example. And "critics" is also not slander.

I am by the way in the moment banned in some forums. So I don't think the people who are doing political forums care really about "free speech".
- In a German forum I'm banned for example because I spoke a Latin prayer for the souls of killed US-American soldiers. (The Romans belong by the way to our German ancestors too and still today learn lots of Germans Latin in school).
- In an US-American forum I was banned, because I was convinced someone who said he is a Jew is no Jew at all, although everyone in this forum seemed to be convinced from his mimicry. I called him Anti-Jew and one time "Nazi". If I do so then I have normally a very good reasons to do so, because in my family died a lot of people in the holocaust. He still sews hate against Christians in the name of Jews - but he is not a Jew. No one should think Nazis are stupid. His hate-propaganda still works: if not against Christians then against Jews or both religions. (He's on his own an atheist).
- And in another US-American forum I was banned because I called someone in a discussion about abortion "idiot". He had used a very idiotic way to avoid arguments by saying something what was very idiotic - and I did not like to change my opinion about this idiot.

It's by the way funny that even the Bavarian Interior Minister Hermann was sentenced from a German court a short time ago, because he said "Neger" (=negro) is not a racial expression. He's right. Nothing is wrong with the word negro. Meanwhile I heard even Martin Luther King had used 14 times the word "negro" in his speech, which is known under the name "I had a dream" - and he used there only 4 times the word "Black" (always in context "black and white").

I guess it's really not so easy to find the balance between the "freedom of speech" and the right not to be wounded verbally.

 
Last edited:
You do realize the lampshades story was proven to be false by all academic scholars and historians? ....

New Book Tells Grim Story Of 'The Lampshade'

Henderson had the lamp for about a year before he sent the shade to a friend in Brooklyn, Mark Jacobson, who writes for New York magazine. He paid $6,000 to have it tested at a leading genetics laboratory.

The lab determined that the shade was made of human skin. Subsequent tests by German and Israeli labs confirmed the finding. But because the skin was so dry, the labs could not tell the ethnicity of the person it came from.

Mr. MARK JACOBSON (Writer, New York Magazine): As soon as you see the DNA report, it's moving into the realm of some kind of really hideous, heartbreaking reality.

KALISH: Writer Mark Jacobson.

Mr. JACOBSON: This object, this 10-inch tall thing that's in the closet of my house, used to be part of a human being. Somebody took off their skin and made it into a lampshade.
 
Or do you think someone just walked into a lampshade factory and said, "Totally turn me in to a lampshade, you guys!"
"Jean Edward Smith in his biography, Lucius D. Clay, an American Life, reported that the general had maintained that the leather lamp shades were really made out of goat skin. The book quotes a statement made by General Clay years later:

There was absolutely no evidence in the trial transcript, other than she was a rather loathsome creature, that would support the death sentence. I suppose I received more abuse for that than for anything else I did in Germany. Some reporter had called her the "Bitch of Buchenwald", had written that she had lamp shades made of human skin in her house. And that was introduced in court, where it was absolutely proven that the lamp shades were made out of goat skin.

The charges were made once more when she was rearrested, but again were found to be groundless. Journalist Mark Jacobson claims to be in possession of this lampshade, but those claims are disputed."

Lampshades made from human skin - Wikipedia
 
Um, no, the Holocaust was a thing that really happened, just ask the WWII vets like my dad who liberated concentration camps.
I agree there were many concentration camps set up during WWll for both civilian detainees and military prisoners.

But it's the details I have an issue with. Things like the alleged gas chambers. For which the forensic evidence is highly suspect to say the least. ... :cool:

Yeah, I am sure they baking 6 foot loaves of bread in those ovens also!
 

Forum List

Back
Top