Why are Jews at the 'Holocaust denial' conference?

And the Holocaust ain’t the half of it. Let Canadian bishops preach against homosexual unions and see who gets taken away in irons. Sorry, off topic, but it shows that even the vaunted “free speech rights” of Western nations don’t always exist.

Is the sensitivity uncalled for or does it need to be broadened to cover all the genocides men commit against their brothers?

Seems like sometimes “free speech” trumps the truth. In issues like genocide can we afford to let the truth of man’s inhumanity to man be obscured?

We are no more civilized now than then, are we?

Well there are real questions that are not addressed. There is the real probability that gas chambers did not exist. The gas chambers at Auschwitz have been in dispute. A Jew named David Cole made a trip there and made some compelling points that the building was not a gas chamber but a simple building that was altered after the war by the Communists in 1948. There were many questions he posed to the curator of the Auschwitz museum that he could not answer.
Then there is the WW2 horrors commited by the communists that get deep-sixed like the hundereds of thousands of ethnic Germans who were killed in the exact same way that the Jews constantly beat the drum about themselves. Germans were sent to concentration camps, sent to Siberia, worked to death. Tito destroyed all German presence in Yugoslavia. Women and children were starved to death. Whole cultures disappeared.
pannoniapress.com/History.html
It’s the burying of these facts while exaggerating others that concerns me.

You can add the Ukrainian Holocaust to those items that were suppressed. Seven million Ukrainians were starved to death in the midst of plenty at Stalin’s order - in the late 1930s before the Germans even thought of gas chambers!

If we use “free speach cannot trump truth” then what do we do about free religious debate? Or various faith traditions? There can be only One Truth. And what about The Flat Earth Society? Do we silence them?

I think when it comes to “free speech” there must be a very wide birth.

Child pornography and the old "crying out ‘Fire!’ in a crowded theater should be among the very, very few exceptions to unlimited free speech.

I don’t doubt for one minute that the gas chambers at Auschwitz existed. No one who is not anti-Semitic doubts it. Find a Jew who questions Auschwitz is like finding a black man who refutes the evils of slavery in America. Hard to do but even when you find him it does not change the facts. What were the questions? I doubt the curator was at Auschwitz when it was in operation so how would he have any knowledge about what went on there unless he had read about it. The curator of any museum will not have all the answers about the contents of the museum.

DShreffler, you are 100% correct. Why are we not seeing the conference as an opportunity to provide historical evidence. The truth will set you free it does not need to be protected.But I dobelieve that there were gas chambers at the death camps given the efficiency and organization of the Nazis.

And of course, slander and libel can be problematic. :slight_smile:

The fact that Stalin was more of a monster than Hitler does not lessen the fact that Hitler was a monster. Rather than down play what happened to the Jews under the Nazis lets play up what they did to Gypsies, Poles, Catholics and other ‘undesirables’. Lets let the world know what Stalin and the Communist did to the Balkans, Ukrainians, Poles and other Eastern Europeans.

Yes, and he ought not to be. David Irving had been demolished when his lawsuit against Deborah Lipstadt failed miserably. Sticking him in prison just makes him a martyr and undoes all that good work.

I find his views deeply unpleasant, but he ought not to be imprisoned for them.

Mike

:thumbsup: Agree whole-heartedly.

Mike

You and I are on the same page. I totally disagree with what he says but I believe in a free society where he has the right to say it. We have the right to refute what he says, believe it or ignore it. Prison should be for people who are a danger to society not ‘Loony Tunes’ like him.

And there’s Rwanda, and Cambodia, and the Armenian Holocaust, which France just the other week has added to the list of factual occurences that cannot be denied, under pain of the law.

**Iran bars Israeli-Arab from conference **

Jerusalem: Iran has barred an Israeli-Arab lawyer from attending the controversial Holocaust conference in Tehran, the Jerusalem Post Daily reported.

Khaled Mohammad, who runs a Holocaust museum in Nazareth, said he was denied a visa to Iran after he sent a copy of his Israeli passport.

“This is a political decision,” Mohammad said, adding that organisers had invited him to the conference when they thought he was a Palestinian.

“I wanted to face the Holocaust deniers and prove to them that they should recognise the Holocaust,” he said.

gulfnews.com/region/Iran/10088642.html

Why do you use quotes when you are misquoting me?

My questions are to point out that freedom does not mean the freedom to lie. You can misuse that freedom too. If you are purposefully preaching lies to promote hate are you not guilty of crimes? Slander? Libel? Are these not applicable? Is there no responsibility to historical accuracy?

Is it suddenly okay to lie because you have the freedom of speech? It is not what goes in a man’s mouth that makes him unclean, but what comes out of it.

Free speech has been used to defend KKK and hate groups and worst of all pornography which causes mass wretched degradation of people dehumanizing them.

Free speech gave us this gem: A woman’s right to choose.

Touting free speech as an open ended good seems horrifically vile to me. Truth is what is good which is an objective value.

Until the societies value Truth above license than freedom of speech will not be worth the breath expended, because the content will be at best vacuous at worst damning

I won’t link directly so as not to violate forum rules, but do a google search on…

David Cole Interviews Dr. Franciszek Piper

There is a video that is in circulation that sure made me question the historical accuracy of the Auschwitz story.

No thank you. I personally know 2 survivors of Auschwitz, one a Jew the other a Czechoslovakian Catholic. I will take their word for what happened there.

I believe the whole purpose of this conference is to turn world opinion against Israel. I also believe that as soon as Iran has a nuclear bomb or missile, they will use it against Israel. That will draw the U.S. into the middle of the whole mess. Radical Islam does not care how many innocent people they kill, or how many of their own are killed. The sooner the whole bunch are wiped out, the better. That’s my opinion, now let me have it with both barrels.

Slander and Libel are certainly applicable, and an injured party may seek redress (with certain exceptions).

Is there no responsibility to historical accuracy?

I’d say no. There can be more than one interpretation of some point of history.

Free speech has been used to defend KKK and hate groups and worst of all pornography which causes mass wretched degradation of people dehumanizing them.

The United States has chosen to be the most free-speech tolerant nation on earth, and so hate group propaganda and porn comes with the territory.

Touting free speech as an open ended good seems horrifically vile to me. Truth is what is good which is an objective value.

Until the societies value Truth above license than freedom of speech will not be worth the breath expended, because the content will be at best vacuous at worst damning

Good and valid points, but the United States is most unlikely to repeal the First Amendment.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.