tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10183882.post110971033552042309..comments2024-02-16T22:14:46.997-05:00Comments on Deborah Lipstadt’s Blog: Emory Wheel on Lipstadt PresentationDeborah Lipstadthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10459645888846468575noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10183882.post-1110996063569414572005-03-16T13:01:00.000-05:002005-03-16T13:01:00.000-05:00"I don't think I'll bother with "anonymous'" point..."I don't think I'll bother with "anonymous'" pointless comment."<br /><br />Of course you won't, Pollie. You can't refute the good argument.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10183882.post-1110370134373697762005-03-09T07:08:00.002-05:002005-03-09T07:08:00.002-05:00Yes well that really depends on how sincere one is...Yes well that really depends on how sincere one is in wanting to put an end to holocaust denial instead of creating politically incorrect martyrs.<br /><br />As you yourself have just pointed out:<br /><br /><I>the courtroom splattering Irving took being a perfect example of what open inquiry can do.</I>I don't think I'll bother with "anonymous'" pointless comment.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10183882.post-1110304579733816672005-03-08T12:56:00.000-05:002005-03-08T12:56:00.000-05:00Paul makes quite a silly point. What do these laws...Paul makes quite a silly point. What do these laws have to do with difficulty or ease with which deniers can be refuted? Hate literature like the "Protocols" is also prohibited. Does that mean there it is largely true? That it can't be refuted?<br /><br />Or is it because it is - quite simply - hate literature?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10183882.post-1110253637849576662005-03-07T22:47:00.000-05:002005-03-07T22:47:00.000-05:00I think Jared has raised a good point. If as David...I think Jared has raised a good point. If as David H Lippman implies, revisionists like Irving are motivated by anti-semtitic feelings and their arguments are so easily discredited and their motives exposed, why is holocaust denial a criminal offense in some countries?<br /><br />Surely making holocaust denial a 'crime' feeds world conspiracy pseudo theories and puts freedom of speech on the side of crypto-fascists?<br /><br />In other words, it lends credibility to where ordinarily there would be none. <br /><br />To quote the phrase: What sort of truth is it that needs protecting? If necessary with the full penalty of the law?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10183882.post-1110225848978581732005-03-07T15:04:00.000-05:002005-03-07T15:04:00.000-05:00Jared:
"You talk about the "truth". Truth is esta...Jared:<br /><br />"You talk about the "truth". Truth is established through debate and the free exchange of information. Debating the holocaust is verbotten in most European countries."<br /><br />Well, it's not in US. Did that change anything?<br /><br />"Thanks for your pop-psychology analysis of "deniers" motives. I find it a bit of a contradiction for you to claim that "deniers" wish to disprove the holocaust in order to rehabilitate Nazism"<br /><br />Not true for all deniers, but surely true for the majority.<br /><br />"May I provide an English translation? Ms Lipstadt refused to take the stand against Irving, choosing to let her expensive legal team represent her."<br /><br />And why not? Rather, I think her motive was as follows: she had said that one shouldn't debate deniers, so it would be contradictory if she debated with Irving, even in court.<br /><br />"For Mr Gherig's information, barnacles attach themselves to working ships and vessels, and have to be periodically scrapped off."<br /><br />That much is true. Irving is not a working vessel, though. He is a pathological liar and a very dumb person. He continuously proves it by posting lies on his site.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10183882.post-1110196153002573472005-03-07T06:49:00.000-05:002005-03-07T06:49:00.000-05:00Mr Lippman, Irving "launched the suit" in response...Mr Lippman, Irving "launched the suit" in response to a printed attack made by Lipstadt. Lipstadt chose to innagurate a conflict with Irving, probably secure in the knowledge that she could depend upon heavy financial backup from her friends in the Jewish establishment. <br /><br />You talk about the "truth". Truth is established through debate and the free exchange of information. Debating the holocaust is verbotten in most European countries.<br /><br />Thanks for your pop-psychology analysis of "deniers" motives. I find it a bit of a contradiction for you to claim that "deniers" wish to disprove the holocaust in order to rehabilitate Nazism and, at one and the same time, long for a second holocaust, or should that be first holocaust? Who can tell, because you have slung so many ad hominems it's hard to say what point you are trying to make.<br /><br />"Ms Lipstadt had to remain silent throughout the trial" . May I provide an English translation? Ms Lipstadt refused to take the stand against Irving, choosing to let her expensive legal team represent her. <br /><br />For Mr Gherig's information, barnacles attach themselves to working ships and vessels, and have to be periodically scrapped off.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10183882.post-1109996914430946232005-03-04T23:28:00.000-05:002005-03-04T23:28:00.000-05:00Mr. Irving is a skilled manipulator with a large a...<I> Mr. Irving is a skilled manipulator with a large audience in highly technological, industrialized, modern nations.</I>Irving is nothing of the kind. Irving is simply a shameless self-promoter who loves the lime-light or more importantly loves money.<br /><br />He'll say anything to sell his books and his reputation, such as it is, rests mainly on controversy.<br /><br />The fact is that Irving's sales figures were already in sharp decline before he decided to sue DL. My guess is he anticipated an out of court settlement with the chance to boost himself back in the public eye, but was unprepared for the tenacity of DL's defence.<br /><br />Now DL's reputation rests on not anything she has written, but on her court action against Irving!<br /><br />What a tacky bunch of individuals historians are.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10183882.post-1109857025613447222005-03-03T08:37:00.000-05:002005-03-03T08:37:00.000-05:00Ms Lipstadt is like a barnacle attatched to David ...Ms Lipstadt is like a barnacle attatched to David Irving's backside. Can't she move on? This blogg simply consists of strident boasts of how Lipstadt, "demolished" Irving, how he was, "devastated" etc., etc., etc., ad nauseum. Are you working on anything of original academic merit?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10183882.post-1109728798760215472005-03-01T20:59:00.000-05:002005-03-01T20:59:00.000-05:00We are so excited that on the day your book was re...We are so excited that on the day your book was released, you confirmed your participation in Limmud-Oz 2005 in Sydney.<br />Peta Jones Pellach,<br />Convenor,<br />Limmud-Oz.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com