Holocaust denial is alive...

marc780 has been a member on this forum for quite some time, perhaps we should wait for him to return to clarify what he said before throwing around accusations?

 

I wanted to comment on this topic but you summed it up perfectly.

 

I disagree. Teachers, as authority figures, are in a very delicate position when they address their students, and should be extremely careful to ensure they do not express opinions outside their area of expertise. However, they do not, by virtue of being teachers, waive their right to free speech, a right, BTW, guaranteed by the sacrifices of American veterans.

This teacher has every right to assert her beliefs about the authenticity, or lack thereof, of the Holocaust, but she needs to understand that she is in a special relationship with her students and cannot teach, even inadvertently, things that are not generally agreed upon by leading historical scholars.

It's my feeling, therefore that she should not be fired in this instance, but be disciplined, and given guidance as to what is proper for her to discuss with her students and what she should avoid discussing with them. It should be explained that, as a professional teacher, she should reserve any exercise of her right of free speech to occasions outside of school.

As Americans, we can not afford to suppress free speech by making a person's career hostage to popular opinion or "state approved" thinking. But we can, and should, limit what is taught to our children to only those positions which are supported by rigorous scholarship and empirical evidence.

 

That is an excellent point DA, with some excellent suggestions.

We can only hope that this is the decision that they chose to take.

 

All of you touch on some vital positions addressing this thread... in doing some research, some Holocaust deniers argue that, since there is neither a single document that outlines the Holocaust nor a signed document from Hitler ordering the Holocaust, the Holocaust itself is a hoax. A big problem with all of this, is that they choose to ignore the evidence.... hence the Nuremberg trials.

ref: Holocaust Deniers and Public Misinformation

all the best,

Jem

 

I should think that we still have to try

 

Yes, I quite agree with everything you write. Certainly, speech that is provocative, or espouses radical concepts, or advocates positions that are not supported by logic, historical scholarship, or empirical evidence, should arouse concern, but there is no basis for denying the right, either judicially or through more subtle pressure, of any person to utter such speech.

It is perfectly acceptable, however, in the case of teachers employed in education programs mandated by the state (i.e. high school) to monitor and carefully restrict what they express to their students. Since this seems to be the first such instance of questionable conduct in this teachers background, I think it is appropriate to counsel her and give her direction and guidance, rather than fire her outright. If she should engage in similar conduct in the future, that is another matter. There needs to be a fine balance struck between the inalienable right of free speech and freedom of conscious, and the responsibilities of professional teachers.

 

Yes, I agree. But "freedom of speech" does not give a teacher, in an instructional setting, the right to say "dumb things" that our children might interpret as acceptable behavior. Teachers are paid to instruct our children according to what is generally held to be true, not radical ideas that are abhorrent to the majority. A teacher is required by law and common sense to exercise the right of free speech only in a non-instructional setting.

 

surely its nothing to do with free speech..in uk we have the national curriculum...too many in the past have been subject to the personal and individual biases..whilst in school time being paid school wages you stick to the agreed curriculum..it has its wrongs and detractors..but there will be questioning but no personal denial or biased individual indoctronation.

 

This is counter to the facts. The war effort was being bled to support the effort in the death camps. By late 1944, early 1945 Germany's rail system was being used almost exclusively for the transport of Jews to the death camps. The Generals are all on record complaining about the shortage of trains needed to move troops to defend Germany.

There was no one in the Reich more fanatical about the Jews than Adolf Hitler, from Mein Kampf to the end of his life.

Given just hours before he killed himself Hitler ended his last address to the German people with these words:

Above all I charge the leaders of the nation and those under them to scrupulous observance of the laws of race and to merciless opposition to the universal poisoner of all peoples, international Jewry.

 

8th and 9th AF aircraft gun cams refute your claim about useage of the German rail system. ammo, arms and moving the German populace was first hand from Soviet over-run lands

 

Actually this is one of the few things I like about the national curriculum, the guidance allows a lot of room for 'teaching style' whilst at the same time cutting down on loonies like the one this thread is about. Never thought I'd say something good about the NC

Actually in my experience it is 'leftists' who tend to be the ones who remember other genocides etc, you are getting them confused with another group commonly known as 'idiots.'

Right, two points on this, firstly the simple statement 'a lot of people survived so how can it have been industrial' (pardon my paraphrasing for brevity) misses the simple fact that millions died, in fact it works out as around 4000 people a day, now whether they are being starved to death or not that seems pretty efficient and industrial to me. The second point is what of the gas chambers that still stand today? What of the testimony of people who saw them operating? What of the testimony of the Sonderkommando and guards who operated them? Are you honestly suggesting that all these people simply made up the gas chambers? Amidst all that horror and suffering they decided for some wacky reason to make up more of it?

An often forgotten point, though I recall that the star was reserved for Jews, others wore a triangle or a stripe unless they were also Jewish, often wearing several colours to show their 'crimes' (in Breendonk in Belgium I think there is an example which is a pink and red star of david, a homosexual, communist Jew).

Again, it seems crazy that Hitler, the ultimate micromanager and originator of all of this wouldn't have known of and supported what was going on.

As for the teacher, DA is pretty much bang on though I would want to know more about the circumstances, particularly whether this is the first time something like this has happenned. Also, whilst I respect this individuals freedom of speech I still think they require some education on the subjec to hopefully persuade them that they are demonstrably wrong.

 

In later '44 early '45?

Source please?

 

If Erich is wrong and all the trains were full of Jews, what on earth were the USAF and RAF doing shooting them up and why did they explode?

 

Tristan: every fighter group(s) of the 8th and 9th AF as fact........proof enough. I'm a member of the 362nd fg as well as the 339th, 355th and 352nd, yes have interviewed many former members. you need to pick up the written histories, in many cases these hazardous ground strafing missions are mentioned in quite some detail.

sorry but Hitler was distant from reality especially when he almost lost his wad in July of 44.

go to you tube and check on the many combat gun films from Allied fighters, they will even list pilot and day of operation at the beginning of each cine.

 

Why would they explode if soldiers were being transported on them?

It's my understanding that the carts in most cases would be split up so one cart might carry people, the cart behind it could carry supplies, and so on. I don't know if supplies, Jews, and soldiers would be on the same train though. The S.S. in the case of Auschwitz disguised what they were doing to a point where even the US spy planes flying over the camp didn't know what they were for. I highly doubt the trains used for transportation had any differentiators on them either. I'm not saying either of the previously stated theories as to what was transported are right or wrong though.

The use of trains for the death camps definitely did place a hinderence when it came to supplying the fronts, how much or how little, I can't say. On the Eastern Front partisans also played a role by bombing rail yards, railway lines, trains, etc. Some conditions such as those described by Guy Sajer involved German soldiers having to walk miles since horses, fuel, spare parts, etc were hard to come by.

 

in 1945 transporting of Jews was not of high priority, getting arm and material/men to the front or removing from the front was and in the case of civilians important high tech and official cretins working for the party and the general populace.

you guys are giving way too much credit to the Nazi party hierarchy for scheming for finding out the "ultimate solution" for those poor souls.

in 1945 we shot the hell out of the Reichsbahn whether out in open field or holed up in marshalling yards, the Soviets did the same