Author
|
Topic: Britons to attend Iran's Holocaust conference
|
blake 3:17
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10360
|
posted 06 December 2006 06:57 PM
Britons to attend Iran's Holocaust conference · Gathering will consider whether deaths took place · Event 'will not be a forum for anti-semites'
Robert Tait in Tehran Wednesday December 6, 2006 The Guardian The Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Photograph: Elizabeth Dalziel/AP Iran announced yesterday details of a conference questioning whether the Holocaust really happened, prompted by an international outcry a year ago when President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad described the slaughter of six million Jews by the Nazis as "myth" fabricated to justify Israel. The foreign ministry said "intellectuals and researchers" from 30 countries - including Britain - would attend Studying the Holocaust: An international view, in Tehran on Monday and Tuesday. The idea for the gathering was dismissed earlier this year as "shocking, ridiculous and stupid" by Tony Blair. Iran responded by inviting him to attend. A Foreign Office spokesman said it had no record of who was going. "I think the government's views on Iran's comments regarding the Holocaust are well known but it is not up to us who travels to Iran." Full story.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
sidra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11490
|
posted 06 December 2006 07:39 PM
quote: This couldnt be the same Iran that some defend against those Zionists who believe its regime is anti-Semitic? -Ohara
Biased and pro-Zionist media can write and say to non-Farsi-speaking readers and watchers whatever they want about someone whose utterings are in Farsi. How would we know that what the media is reporting about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is true ? I am not defending anyone here, I am seeking the truth. (When I am sure of what the Irani president really said, I will decide whether to defend or condemn him). By the way, what happened to that proposed law in Iran to have Jews wear distinctive garbs ? Wasn't it a fabrication ? [ 06 December 2006: Message edited by: sidra ]
From: Ontario | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560
|
posted 06 December 2006 07:49 PM
Well, I suppose it's possible that some people might go to observe it. I mean, it's been talked about so much in the news that it might be something that people might want to witness firsthand as observers to be able to report accurately what went on.I don't know. I tend not to give this creep any benefit of the doubt, sidra. I hear what you're saying, and I know the media is very biased against Iran, and I get crazy, unsolicited anti-Arab propaganda from a couple of ultra-Zionist spin organizations every other day in my e-mail (since I'm the one who monitors the main e-mail addresses for rabble at the moment). And I know that there are certain newspapers who take these anti-Arab, anti-Muslim freaks as credible sources on anything to do with the Middle East and South Asia and will quote them directly without fact-checking the information they send. But seriously - what IS the point of this conference, then? Do you think the conference aims have been misinterpreted? And if so, what is your intepretation of it? It seems to me we'd have heard a completely different take on the conference's aims, at least through indy media sources, if it wasn't an attempt at Holocaust minimization or denial. [ 06 December 2006: Message edited by: Michelle ]
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
eau
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10058
|
posted 06 December 2006 08:10 PM
I think it's probably more helpful to engage than to ignore. If they are completely off the wall there will be observers to say so. One reads about Jews, Gypsies, Russian POWs, homosexuals, Jehovah's Witnesses, Poles, and a myriad others who died under Hitler's madness. Presumably Ahmadinejads argument will involve how many of each were slaughtered which is really about semantics. In the end if Hitler had his way none of the above mentioned would be left. I wish he would address the morality of killing and torture of any innocent persons including our own Zahra Khazemi.
From: BC | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
sidra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11490
|
posted 06 December 2006 08:52 PM
quote: But seriously - what IS the point of this conference, then? Do you think the conference aims have been misinterpreted? And if so, what is your intepretation of it? It seems to me we'd have heard a completely different take on the conference's aims, at least through indy media sources, if it wasn't an attempt at Holocaust minimization or denial. -Michelle
Putting things in perspective, Michelle, what is illegal in some places (like financially supporting Hizbullah or denying the holocaust existed) is not illegal in others.
Whether we, here in Canada, like it or not, there are people elsewhere who do financilly and morally support Hizbullah. As horrible as it seems to us, here in Canada, there are people who think the Holocaust either did not take place, took place but not to the extent it is being narrated, or has been exagereated because some people will benefit financially and/or otherwise from such exageration. We can express our disgust, but there is a reality that is worrisome. We cannot impose our legislation or way of thinking to and in that part of the world. Nor should we feel that a free and public international conference is somewhat worrisome. Well, there are Canadian people taking part in the conference. There are many people from countries where denial of the Holocaust is illegal, taking part in the conference. BTW, personally, I do not believe at all that the Irani president is anti-semite. There is not a shred of evidence of that. Anti-zionist, yes. But not anti-semite.
quote: Iran to host hocaust conference 28/11/2006 Iran is to hold a conference next month to allow historians to clarify "hidden angles" of the Holocaust. The December 11 and 12 international gathering aims to "create opportunities ... for a suitable scientific research so the hidden and unhidden angles of this most important political issue of the 20th century become more transparent," said a statement on the Iranian foreign ministry's website. The event is organized by the ministry's Institute for Political and International Studies (IPIS) which has called on researchers and lecturers to take part in the conference.The gathering, titled "Study of Holocaust: A Global Perspective", has been scheduled to coincide with international Human Rights Day on December 10, it said. "This conference fully respects the Jewish religion and is away from politicization and propaganda," the statement added. Topics include "anti-Semitism, Nazism and Zionism: collaboration or animosity; the concept of Holocaust and its roots; views of revisionists; denial or admittance of gas chambers," it added. "The laws against those who deny Holocaust and killing of the Palestinians," are also to be discussed.
What exactly is being feared ? (Also see the list of countries from which participants will attend). (Al-Manar TV): http://tinyurl.com/ymtxkg quote: The Foreign Ministry official said that during his European tours, he was questioned about Iran's objective on holding such a conference. "In response to such questions, I said that if they accept holocaust as a historical event, this can be materialized and we wish to provide researchers with the freedom to conduct research on the issue. "I questioned their actions in disrupting research on holocaust, given the claim of freedom of expression in the West. I told them that when religious sanctities are insulted, they claim that they are free to express themselves, but when it comes to a historical issue, they argue that this is a redline issue," he said. He noted that out of 90 foreign intellectuals who had submitted articles to the secretariat of the upcoming event, 67 from 30 countries were selected to present them at the conference. Intellectuals from France, Britain, Australia, Sweden, Germany, Canada, Japan, Russia, Belgium, Austria, Italy, India, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Hungary, Bahrain, Kenya, Malaysia, Turkey, Syria and Algeria will participate in the two-day event.
http://tinyurl.com/y9w6jl [ 06 December 2006: Message edited by: sidra ]
From: Ontario | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Legless-Marine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13423
|
posted 06 December 2006 10:43 PM
quote: Originally posted by Michelle: But seriously - what IS the point of this conference, then?
I would imagine much the same as any other convention or conference: To exchange ideas with, and build associatrions among, like-minded people. Not to mention drink beer. Actually, nevermind the last part.
From: Calgary | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Legless-Marine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13423
|
posted 06 December 2006 11:00 PM
quote: Originally posted by sidra:
Biased and pro-Zionist media can write and say to non-Farsi-speaking readers and watchers whatever they want about someone whose utterings are in Farsi.
An insightful observation, sidra. Case in point: Those hard working Jewish folks over at MEMRI who translate the worst of arab tabloid news and pass it off to the western media as popular sentiment. quote: Originally posted by sidra:
How would we know that what the media is reporting about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is true ?I am not defending anyone here, I am seeking the truth. (When I am sure of what the Irani president really said, I will decide whether to defend or condemn him).
Very civil minded of you. You may want to look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel It seems clear that Ahmadinejad's words have have been deliberately misrepresented. Similar, also, to CNN's mistranslating his desire for "nuclear energy" into a desire for "nuclear weapons". Whoops. http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/CNN_banned_from_Iran_after_misquoting_president
quote: Originally posted by sidra:
By the way, what happened to that proposed law in Iran to have Jews wear distinctive garbs ? Wasn't it a fabrication ?
It was a fabrication. You must have missed the retraction buried deep in the sports section.
From: Calgary | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790
|
posted 07 December 2006 03:20 AM
I doubt that. If you have seen any Persoan TV, you will see that Holocaust Denial is on the verge of being state sanctioned. That said it is also likely that there will be some discussion on that topic too. The problem is that the issues of Zinoism and the Holocaust have been so twisted together by Zionists that it is hard for the victims of Zionism to seperate the two. People have been exposed to so many lies in the name of the Israeli state, that it is almost natural to doubt anything that comes from it, or that is said on its behalf. Its a tough call. I'd have to see the express conference guidlines before I made a decision. My instinct is to confront the issue headlong at the forum if that seems possible to do in an honest way. Throwing up our hands and being outraged is not going to convince anyone of anything, unless of course it is impossible to present the facts, which Iranians need to hear in an honest and forthright manner. [ 07 December 2006: Message edited by: Cueball ]
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Papal Bull
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7050
|
posted 07 December 2006 03:27 AM
Those facts, time and time again, have been honest and forthright since 1945.There was the Holocaust. It was an express pan-European attempt at the extermination of the Jewish population. More than 6 million died. Israel, regardless of the anti-Zionist hoopla that happens, can be seperated from ones mind in this. It happened before Israel existed, even if was the impetus towards the creation of Israel. Wishing away the Holocaust isn't going to magically make Israel go away. Israel, rightly or wrongly, is now a state in the Middle East. Diplomatic engagement and tacit acceptance are the only way to deal with the problems. This conference is no different than Hizbulloh or another terrorist organization printing off The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. You can be forthright and honest with the Holocaust. But first you have to admit that it happened, and it was as bad as mankind has ever been.
From: Vatican's best darned ranch | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mini Cooper
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13627
|
posted 07 December 2006 04:16 AM
Meanwhile, on El-Al:Another case of non-kosher food served on an El Al plane was reported on Thursday in the wake of Haredim and the El Al management seemingly heading toward compromise over a similar case reported on Tuesday and last week's Shabbat flight. Jerusalem Post
From: Abbotsford | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790
|
posted 07 December 2006 04:28 AM
quote: Originally posted by Papal Bull: Those facts, time and time again, have been honest and forthright since 1945.There was the Holocaust. It was an express pan-European attempt at the extermination of the Jewish population. More than 6 million died. Israel, regardless of the anti-Zionist hoopla that happens, can be seperated from ones mind in this. It happened before Israel existed, even if was the impetus towards the creation of Israel. Wishing away the Holocaust isn't going to magically make Israel go away. Israel, rightly or wrongly, is now a state in the Middle East. Diplomatic engagement and tacit acceptance are the only way to deal with the problems. This conference is no different than Hizbulloh or another terrorist organization printing off The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. You can be forthright and honest with the Holocaust. But first you have to admit that it happened, and it was as bad as mankind has ever been.
Well then. Since there is no point in talking to them or actively pursuing counter-propoganda perhaps we should just drop the bomb on them. How about that?
I find this whole idea that every single fucking person on the planet should have a total and complete knowledge of what happened in 1938-45, in Germany eruocentric in the extreme. For gods sake, Mein Kampf sells well in India. Did it ever occur to you that the ignorance of the Iranian people on this subject might have seomthing to do with the fact that they skipped the war, more or less, and did not gas anyone, and that it was something that happened, from the perspective of other people, between the Euorpean powers and was played out on the international stage. Most sensible people avoided the whole thing [o]if they could--[/i] the Persians were luckier than most. Expressing the notion that all people everywhere are supposed to have an average "European" person working knowledge of the Holocaust is really just more Euro-centric imperialist thinking. Did it every occur to you, as an example, that when Chinese people think about WW2, they think it began in 1936, not 1939, and the most memorable thing about it was not the Holocaust, but the Nanjing massacre? [ 07 December 2006: Message edited by: Cueball ]
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
ohara
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7961
|
posted 07 December 2006 04:35 AM
quote: BTW, personally, I do not believe at all that the Irani president is anti-semite. There is not a shred of evidence of that. Anti-zionist, yes. But not anti-semite.
A state leader holding a Holocaust denial conference is not according to sidra anti-Semitic. What next, Ernst Zundel is a Judeofile?
From: Ottawa | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Papal Bull
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7050
|
posted 07 December 2006 05:23 AM
Wow.That has nothing to do with the conversation at hand. I guess I'll but out of this thread. Before I go I'd like to say that I understand that people in different parts of the world are going to envision WW2 differently. IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU CAN MINIMIZE GENOCIDE AND CAST IT IN A DIFFERENT LIGHT. You'd be crying the most foul tears should anyone disparage another genocidal campaign. Yet, when someone does it to Europeans it is perfectly okay. This is ridiculous. Chalking this as imperialism. Get real and pull your head out of the overly dogmatic clouds. [ 07 December 2006: Message edited by: Papal Bull ]
From: Vatican's best darned ranch | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
sidra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11490
|
posted 07 December 2006 06:05 AM
quote: IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU CAN MINIMIZE GENOCIDE AND CAST IT IN A DIFFERENT LIGHT. -Papal Bull
It seems that you know something that I -and I am sure the rest of us- do not know, the conclusion of the Conference that has yet to start. quote: You'd be crying the most foul tears should anyone disparage another genocidal campaign. Yet, when someone does it to Europeans it is perfectly okay. This is ridiculous. Chalking this as imperialism. Get real and pull your head out of the overly dogmatic clouds. -Papal Bull
Any dogmatic cloud would be in wanting others who do not have the information or background that you have to know and reach a conclusion to simply take it from you because you said so. Sorry, Papal Bull, but if anyone is sticking his/her head in the sand is you. With a dash of euro-centristic imperialism.
From: Ontario | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joel_Goldenberg
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5647
|
posted 07 December 2006 07:58 AM
quote: Originally posted by Slumberjack:
Is it possible that a country populated and led by Semites be anti-Semitic? Semites do not reside exclusively within the borders of Israel. The enire middle east is mostly comprised of Semitic people.
And even if Iran was populated by Semites, it's an invalid argument. Anti-Semitism was coined in the 1860s and 1870s to relate to Jews. From Wikipedia: Semite refers broadly to speakers of a language group which includes both Arabs and Jews. However, the term antisemitism is specifically used in reference to attitudes held towards Jews. The word antisemitic (antisemitisch in German) was probably first used in 1860 by the Austrian Jewish scholar Moritz Steinschneider in the phrase "antisemitic prejudices" (German: "antisemitische Vorurteile"). Steinschneider used this phrase to characterize Ernest Renan's ideas about how "Semitic races" were inferior to "Aryan races." These pseudo-scientific theories concerning race, civilization, and "progress" had become quite widespread in Europe in the second half of the 19th century, especially as Prussian nationalistic historian Heinrich von Treitschke did much to promote this form of racism. In Treitschke's writings Semitic was practically synonymous with Jewish, in contrast to its usage by Renan and others. German political agitator Wilhelm Marr coined the related German word Antisemitismus in his book "The Way to Victory of Germanicism over Judaism" in 1879. Marr used the phrase to mean hatred of jews or Judenhass, and he used the new word antisemitism to make hatred of the Jews seem rational and sanctioned by scientific knowledge. Marr's book became very popular, and in the same year he founded the "League of Antisemites" ("Antisemiten-Liga"), the first German organization committed specifically to combatting the alleged threat to Germany posed by the Jews, and advocating their forced removal from the country." So, yes, a Semite can be anti-Semitic
From: Montreal | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
sidra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11490
|
posted 07 December 2006 08:23 AM
quote: I have always drawn a very thick line between intelligent criticism of Israel's policy, and calls for the eradication of Israel and the denial of the holocaust. -500_Apples
Calls for the "eradication of Israel" turned out to be deliberate mistranslation and misinterpretation 500_Apples. It is like the "news" that Iran was proposing a law to have Iranian Jews wear dinstinctive garb. It is wiser -even to supporters of Israeli policies- not to uncritically believe what comes out of biased and pro-Zionist media. Crying wolf -as was the distinctive garb for Jews fabrication- not only doesn't help any cause, it is potentially destructive, for when a real thing happens.. you got my point. Denial of the holocaust. People in Iran and other lands do not have our information and background. Some believe, some doubt and some deny. It is an educational opportunity. We cannot tell people: "Do not seek to know, I know for you." This is the ultimate expression of condesendance, arrogance, colonialism, imperialism and euro-centricity. We should look at it from the Iranian perspective: "In some Western countries, doubting the existence of God is OK, but doubting the holocaust is illegal." While there is no evidence to convince everyone of God's existence or not, there is plenty of evidence of the holocaust. Let the evidence speak.
From: Ontario | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Petsy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12553
|
posted 07 December 2006 08:34 AM
quote: Originally posted by Cueball: Not necessarily, since of course the way Iranians relate to the Holocaust is different than Europeans, in that when Europeans start doing holocaust denial it is usually for the express purpose of excusing Adolph Hitler, and the NSDAP, while when Iranians do it, it is part of undercutting Israeli Apartheid.
This and other defences of Iran's Holocaust denial conference are to put it politely fucking outrageous. Is it now OK on Babble to defend racists and anti_Semites because in fact that is what is happeneing here? Never mind differences we may have on Middle east issues but surely to God we can agree that defending Holocaust denial on Babble is beyond the pale?
From: Toronto | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Joel_Goldenberg
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5647
|
posted 07 December 2006 10:06 AM
quote: Originally posted by sidra:
Because a Jewish scholar said so ! Some Jewish scholars said that the borders of Israel should extend to include Syria and Egypt. Should it be so ? Some Arab scholars said that Jews who immigrated to Israel since its establishment should be made to go back where they came from. Should it be so ? Well, a semite can be anti-Jewish but not anti-Semitic. There are exceptions of course, such as a "self-hating Arab" or a "self-hating-Jew".
First of all, 500 Apples didn't write the quote you cite. I did. Secondly, you're misunderstanding. The originators of the word anti-Semitism, Jewish-German and anti-Jewish German, gave it its definition, which is to be anti-Jewish. [ 07 December 2006: Message edited by: Joel_Goldenberg ]
From: Montreal | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Joel_Goldenberg
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5647
|
posted 07 December 2006 10:12 AM
quote: Originally posted by sidra:
Calls for the "eradication of Israel" turned out to be deliberate mistranslation and misinterpretation
According to who? The only source I remember reading here is Juan Cole.
From: Montreal | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Joel_Goldenberg
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5647
|
posted 07 December 2006 10:45 AM
quote: Originally posted by sidra:
Since you took it as the honest truth, could YOU please telle me What did Iran's president say and according to who ? Then we will see whether we are talking about the same thing.
There's the biased and pro-Zionist Al-Jazeera, for one:
NEWS GLOBALNEWS Ahmadinejad: Wipe Israel off map Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has openly called for Israel to be wiped off the map. Ahmadinejad addressed students at a conference
"The establishment of the Zionist regime was a move by the world oppressor against the Islamic world," the president told a conference in Tehran on Wednesday, entitled The World without Zionism. "The skirmishes in the occupied land are part of a war of destiny. The outcome of hundreds of years of war will be defined in Palestinian land," he said. "As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map," said Ahmadinejad, referring to Iran's revolutionary leader Ayat Allah Khomeini. His comments were the first time in years that such a high-ranking Iranian official has called for Israel's eradication, even though such slogans are still regularly used at government rallies." Addressing about 4000 students gathered in an Interior Ministry conference hall, Ahmadinejad also called for Palestinian unity, resistance and a point "where the annihilation of the Zionist regime will come". Al-Jazeera Also from al-Jazeera: "Ahmadinejad caused a storm of condemnation after Iran's official IRNA news agency quoted him as telling a conference: "Israel must be wiped off the map". [ 07 December 2006: Message edited by: Joel_Goldenberg ] [ 07 December 2006: Message edited by: Joel_Goldenberg ] [ 07 December 2006: Message edited by: Joel_Goldenberg ] [ 07 December 2006: Message edited by: Joel_Goldenberg ]
From: Montreal | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790
|
posted 07 December 2006 02:19 PM
quote: Originally posted by Papal Bull: Wow.That has nothing to do with the conversation at hand. I guess I'll but out of this thread. Before I go I'd like to say that I understand that people in different parts of the world are going to envision WW2 differently. IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU CAN MINIMIZE GENOCIDE AND CAST IT IN A DIFFERENT LIGHT. You'd be crying the most foul tears should anyone disparage another genocidal campaign. Yet, when someone does it to Europeans it is perfectly okay. This is ridiculous. Chalking this as imperialism. Get real and pull your head out of the overly dogmatic clouds. [ 07 December 2006: Message edited by: Papal Bull ]
I'd say on the cotrary the joint Soviet, British invasion of Iran in the name of democracy and freedom and the later overthrow and of President Mossadegh has everything to do with Iranian attitudes about western ontology. Whatever fine words we might like to dress up our big stick in, it is still a big stick, and this retrenchment of Iran into "traditional" values, as expressed through Islam (niether "communist" nor "capitalist" as you see) is at least partly a direct result of our own hypocrisy.
The fact that they would question the truth of our post-facto retelling of WW2 is completely understandable, as we are proven liars.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790
|
posted 07 December 2006 02:30 PM
quote: Originally posted by Joel_Goldenberg:
First of all, 500 Apples didn't write the quote you cite. I did. Secondly, you're misunderstanding. The originators of the word anti-Semitism, Jewish-German and anti-Jewish German, gave it its definition, which is to be anti-Jewish. [ 07 December 2006: Message edited by: Joel_Goldenberg ]
Well, yes and no. Jews were considered the advanced guard of unhealthy Eastern influences in Europe by Anti-semites. It is no accident that the Nazi pogrom of Jews went hand in hand with attacks upon Roma people and other "lesser" races, and an attempt to drive the Slavic people back across the Dniester river. Jews in antisemetism, are emblematic of the "orient" in traditional European racism upon which anti-semetism and Nazism are founded. Hitler had very fond memories of Karl Lueger who first foreshadowed Hitlers late pogrom and was also the early 20th century mayor of Vienna, a city steeped in the tradition of being Christiandom's final bulwark against the Eastern Osman and Slavic "hordes" -- "Hordes" being a pejorative western term derived from Orde, which is Mongol for "clan." These xenephobias have deep roots and go hand in hand. [ 07 December 2006: Message edited by: Cueball ]
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
sidra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11490
|
posted 07 December 2006 03:57 PM
quote: There's the biased and pro-Zionist Al-Jazeera, for one: Joel_Goldenberg
Al-Jazeera picked up the story from "Agencies", the originator is the Associated Press. Unlike the biased pro-Zionist media such as CanWest, AL-Jazeera does not "edit", "alter" or "modify" a story, a word or a qualifyier to suit a bias. I mentioned CanWest, assuming that you know about the the scandal of CanWest altering Reuters's dispaches (re: Israel/Palestine news, insertion of the word "terrorist"). Anyway, impartial translators gave the right translation/interpretation. Now, how about the MEMRI interpretation, Joel ? Would you settle for that ? [ 07 December 2006: Message edited by: sidra ]
From: Ontario | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790
|
posted 07 December 2006 06:17 PM
Well I think if one is going to have a serious discussion about the nature of Iranian anti-semetism, and one is going to insist that the Holocaust is necessary "context" for understanding modern Zionism and Israel, then it behoves us to look also at the "context" in which Iranian antisemitism has come into being. For instance, I would suggest that important historical information would include the joint British and Soviet invasion of neutral Persia in August of 1941, the subsequent extraction of oil concessions by the British and the Soviets, the post war assertion of US "interest" in the country and the overthrow of President Mossadegh, and the subsequent restoration of the Monarchy under the son of a known Nazi sympathizer. I assert that the term "antisemetism" as first defined in Europe and adopted by Zionists, is not in fact a correct characterization of traditional Persian attitudes toward Jewish people, which I would characterize as "distain" not "hatred," and one that is founded in the traditional Muslim practice of social and legal dhimitude for other relgious groups, and that this is not at all the same as anti-semetism, though it is also racism, but far less so than the kinds of racism we associate with European antisemetism. As an example, traditionally in Muslim societies other relgious groups are accorded lesser status, not driven out of the polis, as was the case with the Nazis. The Ottomans were the first to step forward and give sanctuary too to the Sephadim being driven out of Spain. The city of Salonka (Thesaloniki) existed as a more or less free Jewish city in the Southern Balkans on the shores of the Ageaen for countless generations under Ottoman rule until of course the Nazis invaded Greece and intered the inhabitants and exterminated them. There is a difference. By 20th century standards certainly the Ottoman Millet system was backward, but in the terms of what went before extremely progressive. In it there are elements of multiculturalism, and at the same time Apartheid.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
sidra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11490
|
posted 07 December 2006 06:50 PM
No matter how tastless the Conference to us, in North America and elsewhere, there is a reality that we should not duck. Heck, this debate reminds me of the "Sharia court" thing. There is no Sharia court in Ontario. But are there underground Sharia courts in Ontario ? You bet there are ! Is it better to stick our heads in the sand ? Would this conference result in "The holocaust never took place"? Only through falsification, distortions and forgeries. The world will watch. Anyway, here is the Call for Papers from the Government of Iran's website:
quote: In the Name of GOD Institute for Political & International Studies (IPIS) "Call for Papers" International Conference " Review of the Holocaust: Global Vision Tehran, 11-12 December 2006 The word "Holocaust" which entered the political literature during the Second World War turned into one of the most important propaganda tools used to politically justify the support for the Jewish People in the 20 th century. In the contemporary era "the Holocaust" turned into a main factor to influence the history and even the destiny of certain nations. The Institute for Political and International Studies (IPIS) believes that a suitable scientific and research opportunity and space shall be provided for researchers and for those interested in order to clarify the hidden and open corners of this issue, which is considered as the very important preoccupation of our world today. To this end the International Conference: "Review of the Holocaust: Global Vision" will be held on December 11-12 th 2006, coninciding with the commemoration of the Human Rights Day. Paying full respect for the Jewish religion, this conference will try to bring different aspects of this subject into its consideration away from any propaganda or political orientation. The main topics are as follows: 1. Historical Survey 1-1) The nature of anti-Semitism 1-2) Elements of anti-Semitism: Religious, Social, Political, Economic, etc. 1-3) Anti- Semitism in Europe 1-4) Jews in the Islamic World 1-5) Jews in Iran 1-6) Anti- Semitism and the emergence of Zionism 1-7) Opposition with Zionims or anti- Semitism 1-8) Nazism and Zionism; cooperation or hostility 1-9) World War II and Holocaust 2. Holocaust; concept and justification/evidence 2-1) Genocide; causes and agents 2-2) Roots and concept of Holocaust 2-3) Holocaust from the viewpoints of documents and evidence 2-4) Revisionists; viewpoints and their bases 2-5) Gas Chambers; denial or confirmation 3. Aftermath and exploitation 3-1) Freedom of speech and the stance of holocaust deniers in the west 3-2) The current laws against the holocaust deniers 3-3) Holocaust: western media & propagandas 3-4) Holocausts in western literature, art and education 3-5) Holocaust and Israel 3-6) Holocaust and compensations 3-7) Holocaust and Jews imigration into Palestine 3-8) Holocaust and carnage of Palestinians 3-9) Holocaust and the Islamic World 3-10) Holocaust in international Relations Here by all scholars and researches are invited to send a copy of the abstract of their papers (typed in Word 2000) in one of the Persian, English, or Arabic languages (one page maximum, A4 size) along with explanations on their scientific activities to the Secretariat of the Conference E.mail: [email protected] or send it by fax (+98 - 21) 22802649 before October 7 th 2006. It is to be mentioned that all papers shall be available to the Secretariat maximum before November 11 th 2006. Address: Tehran, Shahid Bahonar (Niavaran) Street , Shahid Aghaei Street,(IPIS) Tel No +98 - 21) 22802656-7 website: www.ipis.ir
http://www.ipis.ir/English/index.htm [ 07 December 2006: Message edited by: sidra ]
From: Ontario | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518
|
posted 12 December 2006 06:48 AM
Sorry, but they can ask for papers from "all scholars" if they want, but having David Duke of the Ku Klux Klan speak says it all.Here's the idea: They are racists. It is a racist idea to have this conference. It is a racist idea to invite all the holocaust deniers. It is a racist step to give a platform to the Ku Klux Klan. The Iranian government has already told us the result of this conference. They will say there was a holocaust, but it is vastly exaggerated. So your point about the Conference not denying the holocaust tracks a propaganda position already set out by the Iranian government.
From: toronto | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790
|
posted 12 December 2006 06:57 AM
Actually Jeff nuanced observers will note that I said: quote: I assert that the term "antisemetism" as first defined in Europe and adopted by Zionists, is not in fact a correct characterization of traditional Persian attitudes toward Jewish people, which I would characterize as "distain" not "hatred," and one that is founded in the traditional Muslim practice of social and legal dhimitude for other relgious groups, and that this is not at all the same as anti-semetism, though it is also racism, but far less so than the kinds of racism we associate with European antisemetism. (I then said: ) There is a difference. By 20th century standards certainly the Ottoman Millet system was backward, but in the terms of what went before extremely progressive. In it there are elements of multiculturalism, and at the same time Apartheid.
But I guess an asshole like you really isnt interested in complex analysis of the nature of racism, its forms, history, and, you know "context" and are merely looking for a soap box on which to avow your ideological purity in comparison to others. Which brings me to this: quote: Oh, and did I see a condemnation from YOU about the Conference? Or did your post only praise Iran for not shooting dissidents? You know, support Iran no matter what?
I am not interested in your Stalanist loyalty tests, Jeff. But as for David Dukes appearance in Iran, I said this elsewhere: quote: There is no doubt in my mind that David Duke is a fucking asshole. Its hard trying to be reasonably forgiving of people who insist on making it impossible to defend them.
It was actually quite normal and natural for me to make this statement and iy follows from my political views, which are based on principles, not merely preening in a sanctimonious and self-engrandisement. [ 12 December 2006: Message edited by: Cueball ]
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790
|
posted 12 December 2006 07:54 AM
quote: Originally posted by jeff house:
Oh, come on. You don't believe in rights because of your general need to justify the behaviour of Castro, Milosevic, and the Ahmadinejad. That's all.
From over here. Its the general line he is pursuing. Frankly his guilt by association attacks make it completely impossible to discuss things and instead means that we all have to spend our time here annoucing whom and what we support, like so many Red Guards. Its pretty low, and worthy of no one.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
quelar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2739
|
posted 12 December 2006 09:17 AM
quote: Originally posted by Papal Bull: [QB]Those facts, time and time again, have been honest and forthright since 1945.There was the Holocaust. It was an express pan-European attempt at the extermination of the Jewish population. More than 6 million died. [QB]
It's for simple reasons like this that we have to put up with holocaust denier assholes. Recent reductions have put this number as low as 2 million, but because the moment you start asking questions about the holocaust people immediately decry you as an anti-semetic nazi lover most people aren't willing to even open the topic up. In fact, if you read up about most of the holocaust "deniers" don't actually deny the holocaust, they just have questions about it. But again our lazy biased media won't have have any of that, and therefore these people must be nazi's. Really progressive thought
From: In Dig Nation | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
johnpauljones
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7554
|
posted 12 December 2006 09:22 AM
quote: Originally posted by quelar:
Recent reductions have put this number as low as 2 million, but because the moment you start asking questions about the holocaust people immediately decry you as an anti-semetic nazi lover most people aren't willing to even open the topic up.
Who are these credible sources that have reduced the nubmer of Jews that were slaughtered from 6 million to 2 million?
Has a similar reduction been made regarding the Roma? Has a similar reduction been made regarding Gays and Lesbians? Has a similar reduction been made regarding Jehova Witnesses? Has a similar reduction been made regarding developmentally delayed? Has a similar reduction been made about trade unionists? Has a similar reduction been made by any other victim of the Naxis that I ommitted here? You see the problem is that many not all but many who try to reduce the numbers do so to try to portray the holocaust as a minor event with numbers so grossly inflated only to show the German people in a bad light.
From: City of Toronto | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914
|
posted 12 December 2006 09:37 AM
quote: Originally posted by johnpauljones:
Who are these credible sources that have reduced the nubmer of Jews that were slaughtered from 6 million to 2 million?
Has a similar reduction been made regarding the Roma? Has a similar reduction been made regarding Gays and Lesbians? Has a similar reduction been made regarding Jehova Witnesses? Has a similar reduction been made regarding developmentally delayed? Has a similar reduction been made about trade unionists? Has a similar reduction been made by any other victim of the Naxis that I ommitted here? You see the problem is that many not all but many who try to reduce the numbers do so to try to portray the holocaust as a minor event with numbers so grossly inflated only to show the German people in a bad light.
The answer to your series of questions above is "yes". To me, one is too many, but a quest for accurate history is fine by me. Unfortunately, the two issues get conflated and many seem to feel that a reduction in the numbers is tantamount to a reduction in the moral import of the event. Why can't we agree that morally it was a catastrophe, and then study the exact contours of that. Whether 7 million (as according to early estimates) died at Auschwitz, or 1.5 million (as the sign outside currently reads) doesn't reduce the heinousness of the crime - i.e. it's methods and intents.
From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
John K
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3407
|
posted 12 December 2006 09:55 AM
quote: In fact, if you read up about most of the holocaust "deniers" don't actually deny the holocaust, they just have questions about it. But again our lazy biased media won't have have any of that, and therefore these people must be nazi's.
Oh really? In addition to publishing 'Did Six Million Really Die,' Ernst Zundel also published 'The Hitler We Loved and Why.' Check out David Duke's homepage (not hard to find but I refuse to post a link) and tell me he's just a misunderstood guy with some questions about the Holocaust, as opposed to say a racist hate-monger.
From: Edmonton | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|