Okay, I get the message, you don't accept apologies. :mad:
I think it was more like they didn't read properly...
*whistle*
Anyway, back to the topic or some-such:
I still don't think holocaust denial should be a crime. There's plenty of evidence to allow us to make a denier look very stupid, or maybe even convince them otherwise. It's just not necessary, imo - and things should only be crimes when necessary.
I don't think a cheeky wink excuses such an offensive accusation, somehow...
yet your quite happy to make up speculations that the op see's the holocaust 'as not a big deal' yet you cant point out anything in her/his post that states that.
yet your quite happy to make up speculations that the op see's the holocaust 'as not a big deal' yet you cant point out anything in her/his post that states that.
I think the implication was there in the OP - it may not be how they intended it to be read, but I was just pointing out how some people would interpret it.
I think the implication was there in the OP - it may not be how they intended it to be read,
You're the only one to have read it that way, that I see, suggesting that you didn't read it properly.
There's also the irony of you getting annoyed at someone suggesting you said the holocaust wasn't that-big-a-deal, considering it "highly offensive", but it being perfectly ok for you to level the exact same accusation at someone else - based on your reading.
Well...
You're the only one to have read it that way, that I see, suggesting that you didn't read it properly.
There's also the irony of you getting annoyed at someone suggesting you said the holocaust wasn't that-big-a-deal, considering it "highly offensive", but it being perfectly ok for you to level the exact same accusation at someone else - based on your reading.
So yup, serious.
Then there's the topic...
But the OP posted something that implied that sentiment. I did not.
But the OP posted something that implied that sentiment. I did not.
Only because you read it that way - which goes back to the whole "read properly" bit. If you're the only one that read it that way, how can you be sure you read it correctly?
Which is why you being annoyed at being accused of something you were happy to accuse someone else of is so ironic.
I think the implication was there in the OP - it may not be how they intended it to be read, but I was just pointing out how some people would interpret it.
''Some people deny the holocaust and in other European countries it lands them in jail. As ridiculous as it is and horrible it is to deny it, should it really be punishable by jail? There is talk of them crminalising it in England, surely this would be the wrong thing to do, or would it? ''
Which part, the bit where the op suggests its ridiculous and horrible to deny, or the simple asking of a question?
What you did was summarise how you saw the op and put it in quotation marks implying it was the op's comments. That may not be how you intended it to read but i'm just pointing out how most people have interpreted it.
Comments
I didn't.
Read post #26.
Okay, I get the message, you don't accept apologies. :mad:
Ironically, just the sort of thing the Nazis were into.
I don't think a cheeky wink excuses such an offensive accusation, somehow...
Like you did. Interesting.
I think it was more like they didn't read properly...
*whistle*
Anyway, back to the topic or some-such:
I still don't think holocaust denial should be a crime. There's plenty of evidence to allow us to make a denier look very stupid, or maybe even convince them otherwise. It's just not necessary, imo - and things should only be crimes when necessary.
Are you serious?
yet your quite happy to make up speculations that the op see's the holocaust 'as not a big deal' yet you cant point out anything in her/his post that states that.
Are you Jewish?
I think the implication was there in the OP - it may not be how they intended it to be read, but I was just pointing out how some people would interpret it.
Why would that change anything?
Well... You're the only one to have read it that way, that I see, suggesting that you didn't read it properly.
There's also the irony of you getting annoyed at someone suggesting you said the holocaust wasn't that-big-a-deal, considering it "highly offensive", but it being perfectly ok for you to level the exact same accusation at someone else - based on your reading.
So yup, serious.
Then there's the topic...
Change? You've lost me.
But, are you Jewish?
It would change one hell of a lot in your attitude.
But the OP posted something that implied that sentiment. I did not.
No. Why do you ask?
Well, it's a fairly contentious subject, it's hardly surprising. :cool:
A debate and a good one.
Pardon me for being rather offended when somebody accuses me of something so awful...
Only because you read it that way - which goes back to the whole "read properly" bit. If you're the only one that read it that way, how can you be sure you read it correctly?
Which is why you being annoyed at being accused of something you were happy to accuse someone else of is so ironic.
''Some people deny the holocaust and in other European countries it lands them in jail. As ridiculous as it is and horrible it is to deny it, should it really be punishable by jail? There is talk of them crminalising it in England, surely this would be the wrong thing to do, or would it? ''
Which part, the bit where the op suggests its ridiculous and horrible to deny, or the simple asking of a question?
What you did was summarise how you saw the op and put it in quotation marks implying it was the op's comments. That may not be how you intended it to read but i'm just pointing out how most people have interpreted it.
What? What's so awful about being Jewish for Christ's sake!! ???????????????? ... and yes, I did see what I did there.