Hello Peter,

I would like to comment on a few lines you bring up, not in your initial post but in your answers to our friends and obviously not in a pestering or challenging manner.

Firstly as you say, in Europe to contradict or belittle the atrocities in this specific area is considered as a crime all to itself. Yes it is, but to my understanding of freedom of speech as well as freedom of historians to investigate, simply undermines the very objective that was sought. This period also contributed to deeds that were heroic from individuals as well as from nation leaders, all being presently put into the same consequential prescription of prohibitive talk. This results presently in total freedom for any school teacher or government (usually the leftwing type) to garbage out anything he wishes and especially those perverse theories of foreigners being good and likable people, which is not wrong if it was not that these fallacious attitudes are to the total advantage of the new and present invasions of Europe and including the USA of which you have another forum dedicated to. Be it in any historical happening, good or bad, the intervening of laws in a matter of natural human rights is the gravest mistake possible.

The French after-war is a problem that still today is taboo and taboo for the worst when it comes to understanding or merrily to comprehend the present day’s politics and their consequences far reaching even into the Middle East, as well as beyond.

The Spanish civil war, BIG, BIG taboo but thanks to those brave pilots from all over Europe who flew the German planes and yes with the Germans, thereby having learned and understood their tactics is the one and maybe essential little string that permitted the R.A.F. to win the air battle and thereby bit by bit to change the final outcome.

These are just a few taboos that are presently being shoveled under the canvases of “proper” thinking until we wake up to find that all women are also to be canvassed by these very same but consequential laws.

Obviously, I did not say to give freedom to idiots to negate realities, their objectives would be doomed economically, socially and publicly as is always the case in a civilized world. I am saying that when governmental laws step into the realms of moral, it is because man has lost faith, faith in his own reality, faith in his own belonging, faith in his own being, faith in his own country and when civilian laws are not construed (they never are!) to the laws of the Creator and thereby in accord to natural laws they are then laws that bring about the very horrors they pretended to thwart. This is what happened is happening as it always has and will again and again.

Friendly yours,

Robert.

Hi Robert,

The point you're making is one I discussed in another thread in regard to freedom of speech.

As you know I'm a great supporter of Gert Wilders and his fight against Islamic Supremacy and world domination. In addition he is an advocate and fighting for freedom of speech which goes hand in hand with his fight against Radical/Extreme Islam. They are trying to impose upon all of us laws that will make any negative statements about Islam illegal. 

That said the illegality of denying the Holocaust in a few European countries were laws passed by those countries and not due to any pressure made by Jewish Organizations or Israel. Do I agree with the laws? No, because I do believe that each and every one has or should have freedom of speech even if what is being said is hateful and despicable.

We are capable of standing up to the Holocaust deniers but the fact that they still spout their diatribes around the world does anger and sadden me.

History has a way of repeating itself. I wrote in another reply that even with another Persian madman that wanted to exterminate all the Jews in Persia in the end he got his just deserts. Haman was hung and hopefully in one way or another Ahmadinejad will get what he deserves too.

Shalom,

Peter