The holocaust happened

wendell borton

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has called the holocaust a crime against jews which is a big change from Ahmadinejad who called it a myth.

Maybe now Iran can move away from its posturing against Israel and play a productive part in a peace process in the middle east. The west of course also has to remove sanctions against iran. The west has also shown hypocrisy while being in bed with vile regimes and monarchies and talking about democracy they place sanctions on a somewhat democratic country.

Lad Of Banter

well if he said it happened, then I'm convinced

--Kaiser--

The sanctions have really ****ed up Iran and he knows it. He's trying to play nice to end the diplomatic isolation. He has no real power, Ayatollah Khameini remains the real ruler of Iran

Sunglasses Ron

I never quite understand some of this mob. They will claim 9/11 was a great day one minute, the next minute they claim it was an Israeli operation to justify war against them. They will claim Hitler was a great man, then claim his attributed actions which they admire didn't actually occur

Sunglasses Ron

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

He has no real power, Ayatollah Khameini remains the real ruler of Iran

Ayatollah Nakhbadeh, Ayatollah Zahedi, even as we speak, Ayatollah Razmara and his cadre of fanatics are consolidating their power :eek: :pac:

oblivious

[QUOTESunglasses Ron;86705798]I never quite understand some of this mob. They will claim 9/11 was a great day one minute, the next minute they claim it was an Israeli operation to justify war against them. They will claim Hitler was a great man, then claim his attributed actions which they admire didn't actually occur [/QUOTE]



That's politicians for you

conorhal

Yeah it happened, the ony problem with Iran is that they wish it would happen again.

TeddyTedson

Sure Hitler couldn't of been that bad, sure our Taoiseach signed the book of condolences after his death.

Sunglasses Ron

TeddyTedson wrote: »

Sure Hitler couldn't of been that bad, sure our Taoiseach signed the book of condolences after his death.

As a technically neutral state (although in practice we leaned more towards helping the US) and considering at the time he was not a convicted war criminal it would be customary for us to do so for a serving leader from a nearby country.

TeddyTedson

Sunglasses Ron wrote: »

As a technically neutral state (although in practice we leaned more towards helping the US) and considering at the time he was not a convicted war criminal it would be customary for us to do so for a serving leader from a nearby country.

Wouldn't that be the case for the rest of the nearby neutral countries too?

Sunglasses Ron

TeddyTedson wrote: »

Wouldn't that be the case for the rest of the nearby neutral countries too?

The only ones of any size were Spain, Portugal, Switzerland and Sweden as to my knowledge. I would wager the Spanish fascists certainly expressed commiserations. Vladimir Putin has violated more human rights laws than you can shake a stick at but he would still get an official acknowledgement from us if he died today.

biko

wendell borton wrote: »

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has called the holocaust a crime against jews which is a big change from Ahmadinejad who called it a myth.

I'm happy to hear that. Iran is a powerhouse in the region and for anyone with power to even take this small step towards Israel is great.
At the end of the day he'd probably wouldn't hesitate to erase Israel if he thought he could get away with it. Acknowledging Nazis killed Jews isn't the same as accepting Israel.

Oink

Sunglasses Ron wrote: »

I never quite understand some of this mob. They will claim 9/11 was a great day one minute, the next minute they claim it was an Israeli operation to justify war against them. They will claim Hitler was a great man, then claim his attributed actions which they admire didn't actually occur

You've just discovered realpolitik :-)

In a democracy things need to make sense (to some extent). In Kalashnikov-based regimes the "truth" is more accommodating.

EDIT: @Biko. Agreed. We are one step closer to agreeing on the same version of the facts, so that's good.

AnonoBoy

That new Iran lad seems dead nice.

TeddyTedson

TeddyTedson wrote: »

Sure Hitler couldn't of been that bad, sure our Taoiseach signed the book of condolences after his death.

Didn't Hitler send a letter of apology to deValera after the Germans accidentally bombed Ireland during the Blitz?

Sir Humphrey Appleby

Sunglasses Ron wrote: »

As a technically neutral state (although in practice we leaned more towards helping the US) and considering at the time he was not a convicted war criminal it would be customary for us to do so for a serving leader from a nearby country.

That's crap and you know it, did the Swiss, the Swedes or any of the other Neutrals do any such thing?:mad:

Sunglasses Ron

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

That's crap and you know it, did the Swiss, the Swedes or any of the other Neutrals do any such thing?:mad:

At a guess I would say that any country that had not expelled the German ambassador probably did, yes. There were plenty of elements in Switzerland involved in war profiteering and silent collaboration with fleeing war criminals for a start. Churchill threatened to invade us to force our co operation and yet, as neutrals, we likely would have extended condolences to him if he died in office as well. I would be fairly sure the Germans had an active embassy in Sweden and Switzerland throughout the war (if you want to avoid being invaded it is prudent to have reps of the potential aggressors in the country to talk to!) and therefore it is highly likely said ambassadors would have received official state condolences.

Tony EH

Deleted User wrote: »

Didn't Hitler send a letter of apology to deValera after the Germans accidentally bombed Ireland during the Blitz?

Yes. As gaeilge too.

Kiwi in IE

TeddyTedson wrote: »

Sure Hitler couldn't of been that bad, sure our Taoiseach signed the book of condolences after his death.

Really? I didn't know that. The Taoiseach sent official condolences after the death of HITLER?

Tony EH

Did Ahmadinejad actually say that the holocaust was a myth though?

I wouldn't be so sure.

For years, the nonsense about him supposedly saying that "Israel should be wiped off the map" was touted around the world as fact, by certain quarters. However, such an idiom doesn't even exist in the Persian tongue.

It IS, though, a common phrase in American English, and first appeared in the New York Times in regard to his speech in 2005. Perhaps deliberately so.

The actual words that Ahmadinejad said was that "...the regime in Tel Aviv will disappear from the pages of time"

Not only is that a million miles away from "wipe Israel off the map", they aren't even his words. He was quoting the Ayatollah Khomeini and it was a rather off the cuff remark. But one that was twisted and used as a stick to beat both him and Iran with for years.

So, with those words being twisted for political purposes, one is forced to wonder what else has been tweaked.

Ahmadinejad's main problem is that he's remained deliberately obtuse about issues. This is a political mechanisation designed to appeal to both moderates and the hardliners in Iran. But such moves leaves him open to attack.

Perhaps Rouhani will play a better game with the west.

Tony EH

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Really? I didn't know that. The Taoiseach sent official condolences after the death of HITLER?

So did Sweden. So did Switzerland and other neutral nations too AFAIR.

It was a standard practice.

wes

Sunglasses Ron wrote: »

I never quite understand some of this mob. They will claim 9/11 was a great day one minute, the next minute they claim it was an Israeli operation to justify war against them. They will claim Hitler was a great man, then claim his attributed actions which they admire didn't actually occur

Erm, its a new guy...... Maybe, just maybe he has different views from the last guy. [sarcasm]I know people having different opinions on things is strange and clearly unlikely thing......[/sarcasm]

Its good to see that the new Iranian President is making some changes, and is on the whole a lot better than the last guy.

Kiwi in IE

It seems that it would have been more appropriate to refrain from sending condolences under the circumstances. Neutral or not.

wes

Tony EH wrote: »

So, with those words being twisted for political purposes, one is forced to wonder what else has been tweaked.

Well, looks like some people in this thread are already pretty much saying the new guys wants to wipe Israel off the map, and he hasn't even said anything of the sort:

biko wrote: »

At the end of the day he'd probably wouldn't hesitate to erase Israel if he thought he could get away with it.

So it looks like nothing needs to be said at all for some people to make up there minds about Iran.

Conall Cernach

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Really? I didn't know that. The Taoiseach sent official condolences after the death of HITLER?

Well Hitler wasn't all bad he did shoot Hitler after all.

Sunglasses Ron

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

It seems that it would have been more appropriate to refrain from sending condolences under the circumstances. Neutral or not.

Being neutral is just that, publicly at least. It doesn't involve public declarations of "we're neutral but technically we are with the US on this one" even if that was our unwritten policy (not to mention that publicly assisting Britain in a war of any type so soon after the post 1916 struggle would have been political suicide). And snubbing the ambassador of a country we maintained cordial, if cautious diplomatic relations with would be exactly that. The likes of Saddam and Gaddafi were already deposed at the time of their death and so didn't warrant any official commiserations. Not to mention that at the time it was barely even confirmed exactly how much of the Nazi brutality was official policy from the top down. It is not like today when phone video of a Syrian war crime is on Twitter within an hour. Back then really all that was known was hearsay and conjecture.

Elbaston

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

That's crap and you know it, did the Swiss, the Swedes or any of the other Neutrals do any such thing?:mad:

Oh what a god awful crime ... oh the people of Ireland, nazi's the lot of us.

A letter of condolence to the German people - the shame.
Sure it was only Dev but we all had a part in it.
Long may it be used by unionists and grovellers as some kind of lame, pedantic, semi inference towards something that plainly wasn't the case.

Jonny7

Tony EH wrote: »

Did Ahmadinejad actually say that the holocaust was a myth though?

It's not so much that he publicly denied the Holocaust, it was that he was always questioning it, creating forums, inviting others to "question" it.

As far as I remember he never tried to question the number of Soviet POWs or minorities systematically killed - which is typically a dead giveaway to the underlying agenda

He (like Chavez) showed an aptitude for outlandish theories which played well with the nationalist crowd.

Polls show 40+ % of people in certain Middle Eastern countries do not believe the Holocaust happened (not surprising considering the attitude toward Jews in the region)

GerB40

Sunglasses Ron wrote: »

Ayatollah Nakhbadeh, Ayatollah Zahedi, even as we speak, Ayatollah Razmara and his cadre of fanatics are consolidating their power :eek: :pac:

You quoted the Simpsons in a discussion about Iran/The Holocaust. You win the internet...

TeddyTedson

Deleted User wrote: »

Didn't Hitler send a letter of apology to deValera after the Germans accidentally bombed Ireland during the Blitz?

Quite possibly, I'm not entirely sure.

Weird that he had a bit of a soft spot for the Irish.

Sunglasses Ron

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

That's crap and you know it, did the Swiss, the Swedes or any of the other Neutrals do any such thing?:mad:

Additionally, come to think of it pre war it was commonplace for visiting sports teams or athletes to Nazi salute the crowds at matches as a mark of respect, nearly certain there is a photo of the England national team doing it. I suppose it was a bit like teams standing and accepting the Haka dance at them.

GerB40 wrote: »

You quoted the Simpsons in a discussion about Iran/The Holocaust. You win the internet...

Heh heh heh, now they'll never save your brain, Hitler!

Elbaston

TeddyTedson wrote: »

Quite possibly, I'm not entirely sure.

Weird that he had a bit of a soft spot for the Irish.

Well he did have an Irish cousin.

So I think that pretty much settles it then.

Guilty as charged.

Rubeter

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

It seems that it would have been more appropriate to refrain from sending condolences under the circumstances. Neutral or not.

As Sunglasses Ron said first there was the diplomatic side (they live in a different world to the rest of us) but the main thing, I feel anyway, was the full horror of what the regime had done wasn't fully clear at the time of Adolf's death and how much of what was known by the Allied powers that would have been shared with Dev's government is questionable, WC would have had other things on his mind besides sharing info with the likes of Ireland.

You can't judge the people then in the light of what you know today, it all has to be put into context.

GerB40

Sunglasses Ron wrote: »

As a technically neutral state (although in practice we leaned more towards helping the US) and considering at the time he was not a convicted war criminal it would be customary for us to do so for a serving leader from a nearby country.

It was diplomatically right but morally wrong to mourn Hitlers death. For a head of state (or any other politician for that matter) diplomacy comes before morality. There are some exceptions of course.

Tony EH

Jonny7 wrote: »

Polls show 40+ % of people in certain Middle Eastern countries do not believe the Holocaust happened (not surprising considering the attitude toward Jews in the region)

There are over 350 million people living in the Middle East.

I'd like to see the company who took that poll, cos that's some great work done there, especially when one takes into account such a binary opinon.

What a massive undertaking.

Tony EH

TeddyTedson wrote: »

Quite possibly, I'm not entirely sure.

Weird that he had a bit of a soft spot for the Irish.

There's no "possibly" about it. An official apology was sent to Ireland for the bombing, which included words in Irish.

I believe Robert Fisk mentions it in his book, 'In Time of War'.

There's some debate on whether the British "bent" the X Gerat beams so that the pathfinding bombers would miss their targets, rather than a simple mistake in navigation.

Either way, what's pretty much certain is that Hitler absolutely didn't want Ireland coming into the war on Britain's side. That would have been a serious hadicap for the German war in the Atlantic.

Sunglasses Ron

GerB40 wrote: »

It was diplomatically right but morally wrong to mourn Hitlers death. For a head of state (or any other politician for that matter) diplomacy comes before morality. There are some exceptions of course.

In truth all that was confirmed at the time was that Hitler had invaded multiple countries without international approval. So did Blair and Bush, hell we even helped move their troops and weapons for that one! The extent and personal involvement of the Nazi top brass in widespread deliberate genocide only became clear after the war, and therefore not paying respects to an ambassador you had not already kicked out is, if sticking to the rule book, the most standard response available. Flags at half mast and a minute's silence, now THAT would have been over the top

Jonny7

Tony EH wrote: »

There are over 350 million people living in the Middle East.

I'd like to see the company who took that poll, cos that's some great work done there, especially when one takes into account such a binary opinon.

What a massive undertaking.

Which is why I wrote "certain" countries

e.g. 40.5% of Israeli Arabs
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/survey-finds-nearly-half-of-israeli-arabs-deny-holocaust-1.276206

Hamas pretty much openly deny the Holocaust and do not allow the schools to teach about it

Here's one of Ahmadinejad's infamous comments

"They have fabricated a legend, under the name Massacre of the Jews, and they hold it higher than God himself, religion itself and the prophets themselves ... If somebody in their country questions God, nobody says anything, but if somebody denies the myth of the massacre of Jews, the Zionist loudspeakers and the governments in the pay of Zionism will start to scream."

He was probably just speaking about how great Zionism was and what a terrible thing the holocaust was - and was mistranslated yet again

keeponhurling

Whether the holocaust happened or not should be only a topic of interest to historians.

Current political policy for any country or group should not be dictated by something that happened 70 odd years ago.

Just my opinion.

conorhal

GerB40 wrote: »

It was diplomatically right but morally wrong to mourn Hitlers death. For a head of state (or any other politician for that matter) diplomacy comes before morality. There are some exceptions of course.

It was actually done to piss of the Americans. Or more specifically, the American ambassador to Ireland at the time David Gray, who was furious that Ireland remained determinedly neutral and has no understanding of the geo-politics of the nation and it's complex relationship with it's former colonial masters across the water so he was prone to some rather undiplomatic outbursts about 'Irish cowardice'.
He and Dev had a constant war of words on the issue. When Germany surrendered, Gray duly informed Dev that he was sending his MPs to ransack the German embassy for intelligence, but he was told in no uncertian terms that a foreign embassy on Irish soil was not within his remit to do anything with. He had a strop, and Dev in a pique of anger descided to sign a condolence book for Hitler to stick two fingers up at Gray and what he percieved as his imperialist attitude.
It was a stupid thing to do, as most things done in anger are, but a little context matters.

Tony EH

Jonny7 wrote: »

Which is why I wrote "certain" countries

e.g. 40.5% of Israeli Arabs
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/survey-finds-nearly-half-of-israeli-arabs-deny-holocaust-1.276206

Hamas pretty much openly deny the Holocaust and do not allow the schools to teach about it

Here's one of Ahmadinejad's infamous comments

"They have fabricated a legend, under the name Massacre of the Jews, and they hold it higher than God himself, religion itself and the prophets themselves ... If somebody in their country questions God, nobody says anything, but if somebody denies the myth of the massacre of Jews, the Zionist loudspeakers and the governments in the pay of Zionism will start to scream."

He was probably just speaking about how great Zionism was and what a terrible thing the holocaust was - and was mistranslated yet again

Again, who took the poll. What questions were asked. How was it framed and how large a demographic was it.

It's a far too sweeping generalisation.

Tony EH

keeponhurling wrote: »

Whether the holocaust happened or not should be only a topic of interest to historians.

Current political policy for any country or group should not be dictated by something that happened 70 odd years ago.

Just my opinion.

Unfortunately, the political fallout of the holocaust is still being felt today, by the people of Palestine, who have been under the heel of Israeli boots for over 40 odd years.

COYW

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

He has no real power, Ayatollah Khameini remains the real ruler of Iran

Rouhani has been publicly endorsed by Ayatollah Khamenei. That gives him real power. This is a really positive statement in relations between the two countries. The Palestinians won't take too kindly to his remarks.

TeddyTedson wrote: »

Sure Hitler couldn't of been that bad, sure our Taoiseach signed the book of condolences after his death.

Another proud notch on the bed of Irish republicanism!

Jonny7 wrote: »

Polls show 40+ % of people in certain Middle Eastern countries do not believe the Holocaust happened (not surprising considering the attitude toward Jews in the region)

Not surprised. There is a series on BBC2 at the moment where Simon Schama is exploring the history of the Jews over the past 3000 years. The persecution that those people have suffered, most of it at the hands of Christianity, throughout time, is staggering. They are a remarkable bunch of people.

Elmer Blooker

wendell borton wrote: »

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has called the holocaust a crime against jews which is a big change from Ahmadinejad who called it a myth.

http://www.virginmedia.com/sport/football/galleries/footy-lookalikes.php

Jonny7

Tony EH wrote: »

Again, who took the poll. What questions were asked. How was it framed and how large a demographic was it.

It's a far too sweeping generalisation.

I put a link up.

Education on the subject is not exactly high (read non-existent) in some of these countries, not to mention pretty the rampant antisemitism which plays a large part from the top down (43% of Egyptians in one poll said Israel was behind the 911 attacks), empathy from those in the region who recognise the Holocaust isn't exactly high either

FTA69

COYW wrote: »

Not surprised. There is a series on BBC2 at the moment where Simon Schama is exploring the history of the Jews over the past 3000 years. The persecution that those people have suffered, most of it at the hands of Christianity, throughout time, is staggering. They are a remarkable bunch of people.

The vast majority of serious anti-Semitism throughout the history of the world occurred at the hands of Christians. There were countless massacres, expulsions, inquisitions, expropriations of property throughout Europe at various different intervals. In contrast to this they largely thrived in the Islamic world where they were often subjected to nothing more punitive than an extra tax (which all non-Muslims had to pay). In fact the first thing the Crusaders did after taking Jerusalem was massacre all the Jews who had lived peacefully in the city for centuries.

Islamic anti-Semitism has only taken a rabid form since the foundation of Israel really and lectures from the western world on this subject are a bit out of place to say the least.

My name is URL

COYW wrote: »

Not surprised. There is a series on BBC2 at the moment where Simon Schama is exploring the history of the Jews over the past 3000 years. The persecution that those people have suffered, most of it at the hands of Christianity, throughout time, is staggering. They are a remarkable bunch of people.

They're no more 'remarkable' than any other group of people. Countless ethnicities have been subjected to terrible persecution and abuses throughout history. Look at what happened on this island over the course of 1200 odd years. It's mildly ironic that whenever people mention our own history of persecution they'll be called bitter, or told to 'get over it' and met with sneering jibes of 'boo-hoo 800 years' etc.. but someone dares to suggest the same regarding history of persecution against the Jewish people and they're instantly villainised, called crackpots, deniers or neo-nazis.

Funny how people choose which parts of history to place on the pedestal.

With regards to Ireland and Hitler -

I was in the Spanish Arch museum in Galway a while ago and they had a display all about this. Seemingly Lord Haw-Haw conducted a radio broadcast explaining how the Fuhrer had a love of horse racing and wanted to visit the Galway Races to watch it. The British army obviously took this to heart and lined the way to the Races with tank traps and other armaments. Crazy to think, really.

--Kaiser--

FTA69 wrote: »

The vast majority of serious anti-Semitism throughout the history of the world occurred at the hands of Christians. There were countless massacres, expulsions, inquisitions, expropriations of property throughout Europe at various different intervals. In contrast to this they largely thrived in the Islamic world where they were often subjected to nothing more punitive than an extra tax (which all non-Muslims had to pay). In fact the first thing the Crusaders did after taking Jerusalem was massacre all the Jews who had lived peacefully in the city for centuries.

Islamic anti-Semitism has only taken a rabid form since the foundation of Israel really and lectures from the western world on this subject are a bit out of place to say the least.

+1
Anti-semitism was a feature of Christian civilization for hundreds of years. Jews were forced to live in ghettos in many countries. They were also preventing from owning land and practicing most professions (law and banking were allowed, explaining their prolificity in those worlds). Closer to home, at the beginning of the 20th century there was a pogrom of Jews in Limerick

COYW

My name is URL wrote: »

They're no more 'remarkable' than any other group of people. Countless ethnicities have been subjected to terrible persecution and abuses throughout history. Look at what happened on this island over the course of 1200 odd years. It's mildly ironic that whenever people mention our own history of persecution they'll be called bitter, or told to 'get over it' and met with sneering jibes of 'boo-hoo 800 years' etc.. but someone dares to suggest the same regarding history of persecution against the Jewish people and they're instantly villainised, called crackpots, deniers or neo-nazis.

Funny how people choose which parts of history to place on the pedestal.

I recommend that you watch the series in question. You might change your opinion. The 800 years on this island were nothing compared to the horrors they were subjected to throughout their history.

COYW

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

Jews were forced to live in ghettos in many countries. They were also preventing from owning land and practicing most professions (law and banking were allowed, explaining their prolificity in those worlds).

That is where the word 'ghetto' came from. In the early 1500s the Jews were forced to leave Spain, they were being murdered as part of the 'Holy war' and they found refuge in Venice. The authorities compelled them to live in a particular quarter of the city, which became known as the ghetto.