Should I debate a Holocaust denier?

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Malle
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 339
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:53 pm
Location: Sweden

Should I debate a Holocaust denier?

Postby Malle » 1 decade 2 years ago (Thu Feb 07, 2008 8:38 pm)

At Irvings site I found this:
http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/08/02/blogging.htm

Julian Baggini wrote:Should I debate a Holocaust denier?

Posted on February 1st, 2008 by Julian Baggini

I’ve got a dilemma. I have been asked to take part in a university debating society event against the motion "Free Speech Should be Free from all Restraint". Easy enough -- of course people should not be free to follow me round the street calling me a rapist, for example. The problem is the person speaking on the other side: David Irving, historian and holocaust denier.
The issue for me is not about whether Irving should be allowed to air his views: I think he should. The serious issue for me is whether it is right to give people with such views a prominent public platform, thereby legitimising them in some way. In theory, it sounds nobler to always fight the truth out in public, but we surely can’t ignore the fact that the attention someone gets has as much, if not more, of an impact than what we actually say when we debate them.
So if I say yes, am I standing up for free speech, or am I complicit in giving Irving, and his views, more attention and respect that they deserve?
Advice please!

He gets an answer from an independent thinker. Should we invite this guy to the forum? :D

Raymond Goodwin wrote:It is the holohoax pushers who refuse to look at the REAL evidence and to offer rational comment. To them, the holohoax is a RELIGION. To the revisionists - or "deniers" - it is supposed to be an historical event, thus as open to critical examination as any other historical event.

The true believers are quick to state, "What difference does it make if there were few or many - it happened!" I'll tell you what difference it makes - MONEY. Reparations paid yearly to Israel and to over 3.7 million Jews world wide, on a yearly basis, are based on the SIX MILLION supposed "victims." Any REDUCTION in that number carries with it a REDUCTION of those reparations payments, thus hitting the scam artists where it hurts the most - in their pocket book!! NONE of the "survivors" and holohaox believers have yet answered one pertinent question. Let them try this one - Prof. Walter Sanning shows in his book, The Dissolution of European Jewry, that population statistics show that at the greatest range of the German military - over Europe and into Russia - at MOST, some 3.8 million Jews were inside that "net." Encyclopedia Britannica 1939 supports this.

Please explaining how, with 3.8 million Jews to start with - and 3.8 million today drawing payments as "survivors" - 6 million were gassed???!! The personal memoirs of Winston Churchill, Dwight Eisenhower, and Charles DeGaulle, comprise 10 volumes - over one million words. They were written between 1948 and 1959. PLEASE, Mr. or Ms. Holohoaxer, tell me WHY not ONE word is mentioned and ANY of the 10 volumes, about 6 million dead Jews, gassings, or an extermination program!! Come on - where is your vaunted "evidence?" And as far as citing "court victories" - there are no current courts wherein any FAIR trial can be held for those doubting the ridiculous holohoax. They are considered guilty going in, and the court is already bound to support the hoaxers - not even allowing factual, forensic, and scientific evidence that totally REFUTES the tattooed arms gang. And what does that tattoo prove?

Only that they have a tattoo. BIG DEAL!! I have a picture of a Bowie knife that killed 24 people. Of course, all the "proof" I have is my WORD that I've SWORN to - how would THAT stand up in a legitimate court? Face it, you phonies - your day of intimidation, browbeating, and uncivil tantrums is coming to a close. Your LIE is on the ropes, and it scares the hell out of you that you just MIGHT be exposed! So all you can do is call names, and cite "court victories" in kangaroo courts as "proof" of your so-called "extermination." You must keep turning any "debate" away from the intellectual, to the EMOTIONAL - because that is the only way you can keep "winning." High numbers of "believers" does not make you correct either. You are like those who opposed Galileo and Copernicus, who dared to say the earth revolved around the sun, not vice versa, and that the earth was ROUND, not flat. They were also punished for their unorthodox (but true) views. Your time is running out. Your lies are crumbling. THAT is why you react as you do.

TRUTH does not need the protection of the LAW to sustain it - it stands on its own. But you LIARS need the protection of LAWS to keep your naked emperor from being exposed. You have already LOST this battle for TRUTH. You just keep getting paid for your lies. But that, too, will stop. And when it does, the results are going to be fascinating.
I must be a mushroom - because everyone keeps me in the dark and feeds me with lots of bullshit.

KostasL
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 320
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 12:27 am

Postby KostasL » 1 decade 2 years ago (Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:16 pm)

Malle wrote:I must be a mushroom - because everyone keeps me in the dark and feeds me with lots of bullshit.


:)

Barrington James
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 362
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 8:26 pm

Postby Barrington James » 1 decade 2 years ago (Sat Feb 09, 2008 3:16 pm)

Dear Julian- Only if you wish to learn the truth...
You can fool too many of the people most of the time.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10087
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 2 years ago (Sat Feb 09, 2008 11:02 pm)

True Believer Baggini asks:
Should I debate a Holocaust denier?

The question is can he debate a 'holocaust denier'?

Judging by the results of others who have tried to debate informed Revisionists, and Baggini's own ignorant statements, he cannot.

Baggini, and those like him, cannot debate and have their backward & absurd beliefs in '6m & gas chambers' prevail. Somehow I think they know it.

- Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

FrankLee
Member
Member
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:02 pm

Postby FrankLee » 1 decade 2 years ago (Sun Feb 10, 2008 2:01 pm)

Perhaps Irving has been nominated as the hoaxers' strawman "denier" debater.He sounds very authoritative and persuasive, yet he now says there were mass exterminations, even by gas chamber.


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests