millwall32

Congratulations Bou.

CP, I for one appreciate the quality of your work hereabouts, don't let things get to you! Surprised I haven't noticed that before. Where exactly was it posted?

In court, Irving admitted that in 1989 he had denied that Nazi Germany had killed millions of Jews. Whether he or any of the above have used the phrase "I deny the Holocaust" I honestly can't tell you but the IHR have stated that the listed experts have rejected the orthodox view of the Holocaust. I suppose that paragraph is dependant on how you perceive it. So Irving would seem to be one of those who has criticised the numbers said to have been killed while IHR would seem to be a group who have questioned the 2orthodox interpretations". Both of which ,I would, suggest are more accurate and informative descriptions than "Holocaust Deniers".

I know i was among those who threw a sh*t-fit at its being locked but can we do something to get the Richard O'Sullivan thread at least on topic. I ask primarily because I hate the idea of the old boy googling himself and finding that rather than hosting a thread ernestly disscusing his imminent death we are in fact good-naturedly recalling 1970's TV personalities. I'm not saying "lock-it" just asking , when a thread has gone way off topic is there any non-contreversial way of getting it back on?

Think these can be safely ignored since Deathlisters are, by and large, very fussy about the use of proper punctuation and grammar. My very first post was criticised because I ahd dared to take the lazy "writing on the internet" option of DOING IT ALL IN UPPER CASE.

Irving has denied the holocaust and is quoted as calling it baloney and legend. He wrote a book called "Hitler's War". A book which took him 13 years to write after compiling a huge series of unexploited Nazi documents. He commented that Hitler knew nothing, of the extermination camps and murders, until 1943 and that he never ordered the genocide. He even offered a financial bounty to anyone that could produce evidence to contradict his work. Years later he reviewed his work and stated that the gas chambers didn't exist and that six million jews didn't die. What he said that contravened the Austrian law, I don't know. I think it's silly but it does demonstrate a double standard in western 'free speech' ideology. As for the IHR they don't offically deny the holocaust. Taken from their site, they state "The Institute does not “deny the Holocaust.” Every responsible scholar of twentieth century history acknowledges the great catastrophe that befell European Jewry during World War II." However they do go as far as saying "These individuals (listed next - HoS) did not decide to publicly reject the orthodox Holocaust story — thereby risking public censure, and worse — because they are fools, or because their motives are evil, but rather on the basis of a thoughtful evaluation of the evidence." These "revisionist" (a term the IHR themselves refer to as skeptical) individuals DO deny the holocaust. Some outright. Some question the methods and others the death toll. Fred Leucter is dubbed the American gas chamber specialist. His investigation (dubbed "The Leucter Report") concluded that the gas chambers and resulting executions didn't exist. Robert Faurisson is a university professor. In his article for the IHR (entitled End Of A Myth) he follows Leucters work and has been "absolutely sure" that no gas chambers were used to kill jews since 1974. Arthur Butz is also a university professor. He is the author of "The Hoax Of The Twentieth Century: The Case Against The Presumed Extermination of European Jewry", in which he thoroughly debunks the holocaust. Roger Garaudy is a historian. In his book entitled "The Founding Myths Of Modern Israel" he states that the final solution wasn't mass extermination but a resettlement program and the the holocaust was a myth. Paul Rassinier, a former concentration camp inmate wrote a book entitled "Debunking the Genocide Myth" in which he refers to the 30th January 1946 as being "that day that, in the world press, the gas chambers mythology began its dance to every tune and diabolical rhythm; that unrestrained saraband full of missteps has not stopped since." So while the organisation doesn't officially deny the holocaust, does it endorse those that do? It certainly offers their work in it's pages and reviews them throughout. It even invites them to speak at their seminars and quotes a few post-humously. In doing so how am I supposed to feel about the content of their website? I read the British National Party website too. They're not racist just patriotic championing the cause of the downtrodden Briton. I'm sure the readers can make up their own opinion. Are they hateful jew bashers or is it part of a massive jewish conspiracy to discredit them? Death toll? Nazi records place the figure at 5.7 million but various figures are used depending on which slant the articles are written from. Who knows? As time heals the wounds and old age claims the remaining survivors maybe history will be gradually re-written in favour of the revisionist? As for Irving, I don't really know the man. As much as he's offended people I think a prison sentence for having an opinion is ridiculous but it's the price of living in the 21st century where freedom and democracy are an ideology and where a bastardised version has been dictated to us by our financial betters. A place where the revisionism of our rights and freedoms have left us in a state where we're not allowed to think for ourselves and any form of alternative viewpoint is brutally crushed. Lest We Forget... No one you have mentioned appears, given what you have said, to have denied the Holocaust. Questioned it-Yes. Doubted that Hitler knew about it-Yes. Claimed that teh figures have been exagerated -Yes. Claimed the daeths have been used for propaganda purposes-Yes. Doubted that the gas chamber was the prefered method of murder-Yes. Played around with the exact definition of the term "systematic slaughter"-Yes But no one seems to have denied that there was a Holocaust. Rather they would seem to have questioned the figures involved using very varied methods of academic investigation. The term "Holocaust denier/denial" seems to be both alzy and inacurate, covering a wide range of opinion some bigoted, some curious, some concerned. Where is their someone arguing that the Holocaust didn't happen rather than someone fitting into the very broad category Holocaust denier.

From my e-mail. Millwall's 1 through 31 were taken.

Nick Griffin is the most familiar to the UK but there is an organisation called Institute For Historical Review (IHR). Founded in 1979 it's the world's largest centre for holocaust denial propaganda. That's my point. Was he actually denying that it happened or the scale of death involved. No one, including the pre-last minute conversion David Irving, is arguing that there was no Holocaust rather there are people putting forth counter -arguments for the death toll. I for one have heard it placed ,by both Jews and Gentiles, at anything between 100'000 and 10'000'000. Holocaust review and Holocausty denial are completely different.

We've all got them, it just tells you what your warning status is, the Moderators have increased powers these days. All kinds of punishments can now be inflicted upon an errant member. I had imagined it was something like that, perhaps I phrased my original post badly. Whatt does 0% followe by four blue squares mean sepcifiacally. I notice you have no such tag and can't seem to find anyone else with one. Have I been a good or a bad boy? You can only see your own warning level, only Moderators and Admins can see everybodys. 0% means you have no warnings against you. Thank you TF. Trust your warning rating is similar. Hope you are having a pleasant Sunday.

On the contrary, Windsor, I'm also upset that he's been denied his platform. I strongly disagree with his views, but in the very essence of free speech, I would defend, with my life, his right to say it. One of the problems, the world now faces, is that freedom of speech is a myth. It no longer exists. Numerous political and religious figures condemn it by claiming that should be limits on expression. With the return of the 'Glorification Of Terrorism' clause, in the UK, by taking a vocal stance against the government you can be found guilty of a crime and punished accordingly. Any form of political dissent has now been officially swept away. You will be assimilated. The incarceration of a deluded racist is no worse/better than the Islamic fundamentalist hysteria over a few badly drawn pictures. I accept that there is a responsibility where these freedoms are exercised, some cases it's ludicrous to exercise them but the right should be there. It's a dark day when in the space of a week a religious cult and an elected government exercise their collective might and kill off what's left of any form of alternative opinion. We're now a nation of subjects once again. We will do as we're told by our betters. I find myself in strong agreement with both of you.

Many things about which I am in denial but I do not believe that the aforementioned David Irving has ever denied the holocaust. Merely the scale of death involved, which he has questioned by using original documents in a rather warped way. Is there anyone at all who actually questions the fact that there was a holocaust?

Indeed MPFC. the odd mention of the light comedy actor Richard O'sullivan in this thread comes as most welcome.

We've all got them, it just tells you what your warning status is, the Moderators have increased powers these days. All kinds of punishments can now be inflicted upon an errant member. I had imagined it was something like that, perhaps I phrased my original post badly. Whatt does 0% followe by four blue squares mean sepcifiacally. I notice you have no such tag and can't seem to find anyone else with one. Have I been a good or a bad boy?

Like the recent updates but could someone tell me what the "warn 0%" followed by four blue squares is next to my name?

I wasn't aware that there are that many locked threads. The R O'Sullvan thread gets locked and unlocked according to how far off topic it has gone but there aren't that many locked at one ime are there?

Several very minor claims to fame but I will start out with the most obvious ones which is that a relative from my Dad's side of the family is one of the longest satnding members of the cast of Coronaion Street. He is in excellent healthby the way.

I thought it was the Irish term for idiot not because they spell it that way but because it comes out that way when they say it. Like filum for film. Did someone call? that would be about his 6th final interview.

Don't see how he could be considered to be worse than Garry Glitter. Irving writes highly innacurate history that is picked up on and used as justification by self-hating idiots who consensually believe in what jhe says. Glitter seems to pick on vulnerable young individuals and abuse them against there will in a way, and indeed in a location (the far east as oposed to anything to do with the antatomy) , that they cannot do anything about, which is tangible, and which has long-reaching psychological effects. Both bad people but one surely worse than the other.# Also one more likely to be ounished than the other. I think the punishment should be the other way around.

..and still no posthumous outing .............

Lokks fine to me. Thanks.

Why would we not be allowed to post on this thread?

Much as I love the Dickie O thread and have leaped to its defence in the past, as when it was recently shut down I think you do have a point. The Other things vs Axctual posts about O'Sullivan ratio is currently about 7:1 in this thread.

Given the lack of activity above, I'll take it as a no. My strongest recollection is the commercial for real coal fires and that immortal line; 'Yeah, it makes great toast.' How long before he's toast eh? As I said; "Get your kicks watching Bruce on the old generation game"

"Get your kicks watching Bruce on the old Generation Game"

Here is a kinda recvent photgraph of him.