Irving Pleads Guilty To Holocaust Denial

[LoneWolf]

And the Holocaust is hardly a unique event in history. It was an unprecedent scale of genocide, but that is just statistics, it is one of many attempts at gencoide. The methods and tools that were used mean nothing. All atrocities should be recognised and never forgotten, whether that of the Mongols, the Crusaders, Vlad Tepes, the Holocaust, Iraq or Bosnia Herzogovinia. But then neither should any other method of oppression be forgotten either.

 

And of the few things that we know happened to my Grandad, and his comrades, though he never let on much what we do know fits fairly closely to what had been described by inmates of a concentration camp.

 

Stuart, first of all you seem to have imagined I have slighted your Grandfather. I have not. I have never met the gentleman, I have never heard of him and have no knowledge of his personal circumstances.

neither have I, or would I, belittle the suffering endured by victims of the Japanese.

You also seem determined to state I am ignorant of events in WW2 which involved Japanese atrocities.

Im happy for you to say this but, with all due respect, you dont know anything about what I may and may not know about Japanese actions in WW2. You might be surprised to learn that the majority of families based in our area, not just your own, had more than one relative serving in the armed forces in the numerous theatres of conflict during WW2. Dont make the mistake of believing no one else, except yourself, has direct knowledge of what went on in those times.

You are sadly mistaken in your belief that the holocaust was not a unique event. As for your assertion that the methods and tools used mean nothing .. Im lost for words ! It is precisely the methods and tools used, together with the political ideology which drove it, that made the holocaust a unique event.

Just a gentle reminder again, as you obviously havent taken the context on board, the thread topic is focussed on Irving and holocaust denial.

It makes little or no difference to me if you want to take it off topic. To be honest I would find a discussion of Japanese atrocities very interesting. However, you have no basis for protesting your indignation at those who wish to stay on topic, or thereabouts.

[LoneWolf]

Carry on being blinkered if you wish, or give it some thought. And try to come up with some credible reasons for why the Holocaust was different from Boznia Hertogovinia - other than the methods used, or the scale of it.

 

Im not going to trade insults with you Stuart so you might as well abandon that approach.

 

Regarding the holocaust it is precisely because of the methods used that it is a unique event.

 

To expand, the nazis industrialised the process of killing human beings. This had never been done before and it has never been done since.

The process of industrialisation involved the application of what used to be called scientific management to the problem of killing as many people in as short a time and in as cost effective a manner as possible.

Cost versus benefit analysis was used, in an objective manner, to determine which method should be used.

Field trials were undertaken and results reported back.

The results of the analysis were used to determine the killing method and the design of facilities intended to kill people.

It is this process which, given a normal perception of magnitude and horror, makes the holocaust a unique event and the worst crime ever committed against humanity.

To the best of my knowledge it is only the holocaust deniers, of whom Irving is just one, who have ever attempted to pretend the nazis actions were in some way not so objectively planned and executed.

[LoneWolf]

Its a matter of perception Stuart.

Some folk lack perception and cant see the unique horror and magnitude of the holocaust.

That doesnt surprise me as its unimaginable. 600 people murdered would be seen as an appalling crime

but 6 million Jews murdered is seen as a statistic by those who lack perception because they cant imagine the reality.

Others wilfully claim a false perception. These are those who deny the holocaust or falsely claim it was no different to any other act of mass murder in an attempt to trivialise what happened.

The majority, those with normal perception, recognise the holocaust for what it was. The worst crime ever committed against humanity.

Im with the majority on this one.

[LoneWolf]

I think you will also find, if you personally attach a special significance to numbers, that Stalin was responsible for the deaths of far more people than Hitler was, and managed to cover it up and get away with it. But they were being killed because they didn't fit in with his vision for society, or posed a threat to himself or his ideology. So that's ok then, as long as they weren't being killed because of their race.........

I think now we are getting to the nub of your arguments which, you might recall, began with you accusing me of slighting your Grandfather in some way.

The majority perception of the holocaust is that it is the worst crime ever committed against humanity.

I have already stated I agree with this perception and have give my reasons.

There are people, who for a number of reasons would wilfully deny either the facts of the holocaust or its significance. This is a minority perception of history and, in my opinion, is usually politically motivated, for example by promotion of neo nazi ideas. Irving is an example.

There are others, for example extremist Muslims or racists, who would wilfully deny either the facts or the significance of the holocaust for reasons best known to themselves. im not particularly anxious to uncover those reasons for discussion but they are self evident.

[Rog]

Reminding each other of the other atrocities that took place in and around WW2 is right and proper.

 

While we’re at it let’s think also about the 25 million plus Russians who died and saved Britain in the process. Had it not been for Hitler starting Barberossa the six months period between the defeat of Britain – for that is precisely what it was - and the entry of the US after Pearl Harbour which saw the UK being saved there would have been a VERY different outcome to WW2.

 

Let’s also think about the infamous Nanjing (Nanking) massacre late ’38 and what the Japanese got up to there – all a part of a Japanese ‘lebensraum’ policy and a view of the Chinese as being their oriental ‘untermenshen’.

 

Let’s also remember that the Japanese undertook ‘medical’ experiments, not out of some phuckwit idea about Aryan origins but in order to make – and later use – biological weapons. It’s also worth remembering the deals struck between the US and various Japanese scientists and army general staff whereby information obtained from these experiments were traded for immunity from prosecution for war crimes in many cases.

 

Let’s also remember the bombing campaigns against Dresden, Hamburg, and other German cities and the true horrors that those people suffered and the Japanese and the horrors that they endured because of what their leaders had indoctrinated them with. It’s interesting to compare and contrast the behaviour and conduct of the Japanese fighting men during earlier conflicts and what they became during the 30’s culminating in their attacks on China and the West.

 

It’s also worth note that whereas the European Axis nations led by Germany took measures to stand up and recognise what their leaders had led them to do and go further and make a real effort to redress the situation the Japanese STILL refuse to acknowledge their misdeeds and even fail to teach their kids what their now grandparents and great grandparents did and that just has to be wrong.

 

Personally I do see the holocaust as unique if for no other reason than it represented a cold deliberate attempt to obliterate a people from the world. Not a people decided by genetics but by religion (I’ll go into that if anyone really wants) but today I see little knowledge let alone recognition of the savagery that broke out I the world in the 20th century, something that I think is beyond dangerous.

 

Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it. (George Santayana)

[mollag]

I wish i had said all that.

[Jacqueline]

Yes. I too wish I had the knowledge and skills to put together such a post.

 

It's still so sad to read it though. Man against man.

 

I know it's a very naive question but... why?

 

What is it about us that brings us to the point that we believe that our particular 'cause' is so worthwhile that we need to destroy so many other that do not agree with us.

 

One of the things that I find disturbing about Rog's posts are the hatred and intolerance that they contain. And.. here I go being naive again... I cannot work out why a man, who has see the horrendous things done to his own race, is not able to see that to perpetuate will eventually lead to the signing of death warrants for us all.

 

An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind and all that.

 

I'm not being obtuse here Rog, but please explain to me in simple terms why it is so important for you to continue with your intolerance. I want to try and understand but please also try to understand that I am genuinely scared about what your answer might be.

[Rog]

Yes. I too wish I had the knowledge and skills to put together such a post.

 

It's still so sad to read it though. Man against man.

 

I know it's a very naive question but... why?

 

What is it about us that brings us to the point that we believe that our particular 'cause' is so worthwhile that we need to destroy so many other that do not agree with us.

 

One of the things that I find disturbing about Rog's posts are the hatred and intolerance that they contain. And.. here I go being naive again... I cannot work out why a man, who has see the horrendous things done to his own race, is not able to see that to perpetuate will eventually lead to the signing of death warrants for us all.

 

An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind and all that.

 

I'm not being obtuse here Rog, but please explain to me in simple terms why it is so important for you to continue with your intolerance. I want to try and understand but please also try to understand that I am genuinely scared about what your answer might be.

 

My hatred and intolerance – for that is precisely what it is – is against a hateful and intolerant ideology. One that is uniquely committed to the utter subjugation and enslavement of everybody to its archaic, cruel, and inhuman values and morality.

 

I don’t hate the people caught up in its dictates, I hate the evil thing that enslaves them. That is what some people fail to see.

 

Unlike any other religion the ‘religion’ that is islam stands alone in the demands it makes upon its adherents and the direction it gives them.

 

In addition unlike all other major religions it is absolutely incapable of being ‘modernised’ to match social evolution, the very concept is non-islamic and even blasphemous to propose.

 

It demands that all those who do not believe in what it presents must be converted or utterly subjugated, it is incapable of establishing a co-existence with people having other – or worst of all – NO beliefs, the very best that is on offer is a period of truce with penalties being expected in the form of taxes and very restricted freedoms.

 

But very few people realise this. Most see it as ‘just another religion’ and believe that ‘all religions are the same one way or another’.

 

Not so.

 

The truth is that Nazism is to politics what islam is to religion.

 

THAT is why I am so utterly intolerant of islam. I took an interest in the subject years ago when I wanted to find out just why the mohammedans had such an inbuilt hatred for us, a hatred that transcended anything that was ever found in Europe. I studied it for decades,

In the process I learned a very great deal that by virtue of my work involving periods of work overseas as well as providing the opportunity to meet with and discuss the subject with ‘followers of the prophet’ of various sects I was able to confirm or correct what I had leaned.

 

I have seen the true face of the enslaving and utterly anti-Western cult that is islam, and I detest it.

[Jacqueline]

Rog, please, take your angry head off and talk to me like a man who thinks, breathes and laughs, and not like a propaganda machine.

 

Talk to me in language I can understand. Imagine (and you wouldn't be far wrong) that I know nothing about what has gone on for the last thousand years. Just be yourself and try to explain why you (and others) feel so strongly about things that you are prepared to see human beings killed in your name.

 

And please also explain to me how it is that all the persecution and hatred your race has experienced has not allowed you to see that the path you and many others choose to take does not work.

 

I truly do not understand and despair at man's inhumanity to man.

[Rog]

Rog, please, take your angry head off and talk to me like a man who thinks, breathes and laughs, and not like a propaganda machine.

 

Talk to me in language I can understand. Imagine (and you wouldn't be far wrong) that I know nothing about what has gone on for the last thousand years. Just be yourself and try to explain why you (and others) feel so strongly about things that you are prepared to see human beings killed in your name.

 

And please also explain to me how it is that all the persecution and hatred your race has experienced has not allowed you to see that the path you and many others choose to take does not work.

 

I truly do not understand and despair at man's inhumanity to man.

 

 

Ouch!

 

Well here goes!

 

I guess it comes down to freedom. Is freedom something worth fighting for.

 

I happen to think it is about the only thing that is worth fighting for (other than your own kith and kin that is).

 

The freedoms that we have in the West are something that has been hard won, but freedom is something that is anathema in islam. The idea of a permanent stable co-existence with a non-islamic society is impossible in islam. In the past when there has been islamic domination of a nation as in Spain prior to the marriage between Ferdinand and Isabella and with the joining of their kingdoms both of which had managed to defeat the islamic invaders, they then fought to free the rest of Sapin which they successfully did in 1492.

 

Prior to this restoration of freedom (Freedom? The same two set up The Spanish inquisition!) non-mohammedans had to convert to islam or to live under a regime that imposed all sorts of conditions.

 

Here’s the koranic quote that is used --- And every mohammedan MUST undertake to ---

 

"Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book (Christians and Jews), until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection." (Surah 9:29)

 

That’s as good as it gets. More often non-believers and the like were converted --- by the sword. And make no mistake, it was never a figurative sword. I can go into the thinking about how killing a non-mohammedan is doing him a favour as it opens the possibility of his being a martyr in his own right.

 

A wonderful book the koran is for not only directing killing bit also giving excuses of why it was all the fault of the guy that you killed anyway.

 

But there’s so much more. Look back at the early days.

 

The koran and the Hadiths (descriptions of what old mo got up to) he comes over as a rather --- interesting --- individual. In fact vicious murdering thieving terrorist wood not be particularly imprecise, and explains a great deal about the fundamentals of islam.

 

On one occasion after having been booted out of Mecca by the population who had little time for his trouble making it’s recorded how he attacked a caravan of Arab tribesmen and looting their camels, mo and his gang kidnapped their women and staged an orgy of rape.

 

Verbatim copy of the good translation ---

 

We went out with allah’s messenger (mo) on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them.

 

So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing azl (withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas allah’s messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked allah’s messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born. (From Salih Muslim book 8 3432.

 

 

On another occasion to the men of a Jewish tribe, mo offered the choice of conversion to Islam or death.

The Jews said no and straightway the full compliment of males around 900, were decapitated --- right in front of their women and children.

 

"Truly the judgment of allah was pronounced on high," was mo’s reported comment. The Jewish women were subsequently raped.

 

Even by the morality of seventh century Arabia, mo had to resort to divine revelations as a means of excusing the atrocities that he urged his followers to undertake. Amazing what you can do when NO war crimes exist and all is right in the eyes of god.

 

And nothing has changed in terms of laws, morality, objectives, views of non-believers, life, the universe, anything ----- and nothing ever can.

 

Not only did mo make it absolutely clear that he was the very last prophet that there would be so closing the door on anyone updating the horrific codex of seventh century tribal warfare that covered everything from how often prayer was to be undertaken to what punishment should be doled out for a criminal act, but added to that the haddiths provide a multitude of ‘worked examples’ to prevent any significant interpretation of what was directed to be done.

 

The final nail in the coffin, the belt to the braces as it were, is the assertion that the koran is the absolute written word of god and so is perfect in every way. On that basis how could a change ever be needed? As all laws and punishments are set out what need is there for democracy – it can’t actually make any meaningful changes. For that matter to even suggest that change is needed implies that the kiran is in some way inadequate or imperfect and that would be blasphemy with the penalty of ---- death.

 

There’s so very much more that I could so easily go into about so many aspects of islam that I find abhorrent ranging from the awful attitudes to women through to the concept of land once held by islamic forces being always islamic (look out Spain!) but time and space not to mention any readers patience provide a limiting factor.

 

So why do I hate islam? Because of what it compels its followers to do. Do I hate it’s followers? No. I pity them. But I do hate what many of them do in the name of their foul creed.

[The Old Git]

Did I read something, somewhere, about them believing that once all of the world is Islam then their prophet or god would come down do earth again? So they either need to kill or convert all of the non believers?

[The Old Git]

In one of today's papers -

 

These are questions to bin Laden from al-Qa'eda members dated September 2000. No responses are included.

 

• I owe some debt to Moslems back home and I came to the land of Jihad after a friend promised to pay this debt. I don't know whether he did or not. Should I go to the frontline or not because I am not sure of this matter?

 

• There are infidels in Pakistan and India, of Christians and others. Is it OK for us to kill them and take their possessions and properties? Is it OK to steal from the infidels residing the Islamic and non Islamic countries?

 

• Does the freedom fighter face his creator in his tomb if he goes out for jihad and dies as a result of a snake bite or a kick of mule?

 

• You mentioned once that a front will open in Uzbekistan, but we heard nothing about it afterwards. Will this front open soon or not?

 

• Why there isn't enough personal weapons (Kalashnikov) in the camp for all the fighters even for self defence, particularly there is a possibility of an attack by global infidel countries at any time?

 

• I live in Europe because I was born there. What is the ruling on stealing their possessions and killing them in their homes?

 

• I have a nephew who commits the big sins but he loves you and wishes to join the Jihad movement to atone for his sins. What is the best way to bring him here?

[Rog]

Did I read something, somewhere, about them believing that once all of the world is Islam then their prophet or god would come down do earth again? So they either need to kill or convert all of the non believers?

 

 

Oh shi'Ite!

 

Do you REALLY want a treatise on this? I’ll have a go if you want but it's bloomin complex" For one thing there's this donkey with two ears ---

 

Want more?

[Rog]

In one of today's papers -

 

These are questions to bin Laden from al-Qa'eda members dated September 2000. No responses are included.

 

• I owe some debt to Moslems back home and I came to the land of Jihad after a friend promised to pay this debt. I don't know whether he did or not. Should I go to the frontline or not because I am not sure of this matter?

 

• There are infidels in Pakistan and India, of Christians and others. Is it OK for us to kill them and take their possessions and properties? Is it OK to steal from the infidels residing the Islamic and non Islamic countries?

 

• Does the freedom fighter face his creator in his tomb if he goes out for jihad and dies as a result of a snake bite or a kick of mule?

 

• You mentioned once that a front will open in Uzbekistan, but we heard nothing about it afterwards. Will this front open soon or not?

 

• Why there isn't enough personal weapons (Kalashnikov) in the camp for all the fighters even for self defence, particularly there is a possibility of an attack by global infidel countries at any time?

 

• I live in Europe because I was born there. What is the ruling on stealing their possessions and killing them in their homes?

 

• I have a nephew who commits the big sins but he loves you and wishes to join the Jihad movement to atone for his sins. What is the best way to bring him here?

 

Sounds distinctly fishy to me.

 

These three especially should be known by any even slightly observant mohammedan. Apart from anything elsethe word 'jihad' is wrong in both use and context.

 

"• I owe some debt to Moslems back home and I came to the land of Jihad after a friend promised to pay this debt. I don't know whether he did or not. Should I go to the frontline or not because I am not sure of this matter?"

 

• There are infidels in Pakistan and India, of Christians and others. Is it OK for us to kill them and take their possessions and properties? Is it OK to steal from the infidels residing the Islamic and non Islamic countries?

 

• Does the freedom fighter face his creator in his tomb if he goes out for jihad and dies as a result of a snake bite or a kick of mule?"

[The Old Git]

Do you REALLY want a treatise on this? I’ll have a go if you want but it's bloomin complex" For one thing there's this donkey with two ears ---

 

Want more?

 

Hmmm, not really too sure if it's worth it. It's too big for a yes/no type answer? Don't want to go too far off topic after all