There have been several such incidents at the universities in Lyon, where a group supporting negationist theses constantly comes up against left-wing and antiracist Lyonnais.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
And you ate it right up.

---

Does Gollnisch always talk this ambiguously? What he says is stupid (he doesn't deny that there were gas chambers, but ... something? ... about them should still be up for open discussion -- huh?), but ambiguous and elusive.

I always find this discussion difficult. Someone yesterday on another thread claimed that the split in attitudes to hate speech is broadly European/American, with the Europeans more inclined to prohibit certain kinds of speech, the Americans more inclined to oppose most limits to free expression. These days, I should think, those divisions are not at all that clear along national or cultural lines.

My own tendencies are always civil libertarian first. "Fascists have no right to speak" -- I don't know. How would we know how many of them there still are and how stupid they still are if we didn't read and hear their perverse mental meanderings?

quote:

---

Cueball, Lagatta posted a topic that had nothing to do with the Middle East. And you accuse me of propagandizing. This is in the wrong topic area and a troll of the worst kind. I dont believe you have any interest whatsoever in Lagatta's topic.

---

I am as interested in preventing holocaust enabling, as I am in preventing Holocaust denial.

Dehumanization of the victim is one of the most important steps in enabling holocaust. It was a key factor in creating the social conditions which allowed normal Germans to support and engage in holocaust. In my view denying the existance of the Palestian people, as a people is holocaust enabling.

You have not, so far brought up this old cannard, in regard to the Palestinian people, but some who visit here do. And I think if the board is going have a policy against holocaust denial, I think also it should have a policy against Holocaust enabling, such as the kind represented by denying the "existance of the Palestinian people."

The point behind preventing Holocaust denial is that Holocaust denial is an holocaust enabler, likewise so with denying the existance of Palestinians. That is how this relates to Lagata's post.

[ 28 October 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:

I am as interested in preventing holocaust enabling, as I am in preventing Holocaust denial.

Dehumanization of the victim is one of the most important steps in enabling holocaust. It was a key factor in creating the social conditions which allowed normal Germans to support and engage in holocaust. In my view denying the existance of the Palestian people, as a people is holocaust enabling.

You have not, so far brought up this old cannard, in regard to the Palestinian people, but some who visit here do. And I think if the board is going have a policy against holocaust denial, I think also it should have a policy against Holocaust enabling, such as the kind represented by denying the "existance of the Palestinian people."

The point behind preventing Holocaust denial is that Holocaust denial is an holocaust enabler, likewise so with denying the existance of Palestinians. That is how this relates to Lagata's post.

[ 28 October 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]

---

Now look What you've Done! A perfectly good thread about French Fascists will decend into a flame war about wheather Isreal Is capable of recreating the worst fascist atrocity of the 20th-century. They are. I'm just disappointed that you ruined what would otherwise have been a rather fruitful discussion of french anti-Semitism.

[ 28 October 2004: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

[ 28 October 2004: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

And also, many people directly equate the rise of "anti-semetism in europe" to the Palestine-Israel conflict, trying to assert that it is Arabs who are the motive force behind it. Why is is inapproiate to relate the same circumstances to the same issue, except from a Pro-palestinian perspective?

I also, think that discussion of the roots of racism and facism are perfectly legitimate when discussing Holocuast denial, and similarities between certian modes of thought.

[ 28 October 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by lagatta:
A coalition of antiracist groups in Lyon succeeded in forcing the cancellation of a class by one of the leaders of the far-right Front National, after he made a "negationist" (Holocaust-denying)

---

actually there are 2 different issues at work here. holocaust denial and "far right nazism" has nothing to do with the palestinian - israeli situation. in fact most of the far right members are against both jew and arab alike.

quote:

---

Alright. First, a question. What reasoning did Golda M. use when she said that there was no such thing as a palestinian?

---

1) I don't know exactly what her reasoning was, but the general arguement is that Jordan had annexed the West Bank and been given Jordanian citizenship. Among the problems with this is that only Great Britain and Pakistan ever recognized Jordan's sovereignty, and no Arab country ever did. Neither did Israel.

The point should also be made that Jordanian sovereignty was eschewed by a great number of Palestinians and the fact that the PLO called for a discreet entity seperate from Jordan in 1964 (prior to the Israeli invasion and occupation) including all of the territory of Israel and the West Bank and exclusive of Jordan, points to this.

There is also a sub-arguement about the nature of the British mandate over the entire zone, including Syria, Jordan and Palestine. These are mostly arguments about maps, and though while it is the case all these peoples are ethnically related they are the not the same, more or less in the way that all the British peoples are related, yet not the same.

If my memeory serves me correctly, Jordan is ruled not by the any of the Shami (Syrian) people but by the decendants of the Hedjaz. There is a clear ethnic distinction between the two. They are in fact also invaders as their territory originally extended along west coast of the Arabian Peninsula down to Yemen.

What clearer evidence of the distinction between the Palestinians and the Jordanian monarchy is there than the 1970 revolt against Hussein?

2) It is not relevant what Golda M. thought. What is relevant is what the Palestinians thought. All of these intricate arguement about history, borders, citizenship and ethnicity mean nothing, when faced with the basic fact that 'nationality' is self-determined. In the same manner I might, through the same kind of extremely officious argumentation*, just as well claim that given that there was no Jewish state prior to 1948, that Jews were not a people, prior to 1948.

If I were to say such I would without a doubt be castigated for my extreme racism, not unlike the kind of racism based on the historical revisionism of the Holocaust deniers.

If Palestinians or Israelis say they are "a people," they are. It is that simple.

* Interestingly, extremely officious argumentation is also a trait of most Holocaust denial.

[ 28 October 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]

Back to serious matters - Cueball, you know I agree with you about justice for the Palestinians, but why are you trying to derail this thread?

quote:

---

I have a (Jewish) friend visiting from Brooklyn, arriving this evening. He'd say his part of New York is the Jewish State...

---

Along similar lines I heard a comedian from New York state that he thought Israel should give up all the occupied territories... except for New York.

[ 28 October 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]

Also a lot of European countries have certain identity 'issues'. In France they've completely failed to recognize the multicultural aspect of that country like we have in Canada. And they essentially say all people in France (citizens) are Frenchmen and Frenchwomen but they seem really worry about loosing their essential 'Frenchness'. This is due to a variety of things including a low birthrate, negative internal population growth and the necessity to maintain and grow population via immigration from largely non-white countries. Yeah I know I'm basically saying there's an element of racism, but I stand by it. A prof of mine basically said there's a certain worry that these non-Caucasians won't be able to become French like other (earlier) immigrants to France were able too. It's an issue that's repeated in a few other countries, Germany included. These far-right parties are also gaining traction within the mainstream of Europe partially due to this. And I think that will have to be dealt with should they be pushed back to the far margins of European political thought.

I agree with Lagatta, I tend to support a civil liberetarian approach. But with these groups I just don't know that approach is possible. Anti-racist action is very nessecary, but these European societies are going to have to come to terms with these problems.

[Ahhh am I ever going to be able to type a post w/out editing today? ]

[ 29 October 2004: Message edited by: Vansterdam Kid ]