Abstract The writer explains that Holocaust deniers feel that the material taught in schools and colleges is propaganda written by Jews to gain sympathy, collect money for the State of Israel and to perpetrate hatred of the Nazi movement. It explains that the Holocaust deniers feel that their opinions should be taught in schools and colleges as part of the curriculum. The writer contends that the Holocaust curriculum taught is accurate and need not include claims made by historical deniers. The paper brings the three main arguments made by Holocaust deniers. The writer states objections to each argument and raises doubts about them. In conclusion, the writer states that Holocaust deniers have no logical arguments when confronted with information that is contrary to their beliefs and that the historical convergence of evidence proving the Holocaust did happen overpowers the illogical thinking of the deniers.
Table of Contents:
Statement
Argument One
Objection
Reply
Argument Two
Objection
Reply
Argument Three
Objection
Reply
Conclusion
From the Paper "Holocaust deniers do not deny that there are gas chambers and that some were even used to murder concentration camp victims. We simply state that they were not used for the mass murder of Jews during the Final Solution. They were there for the delousing of linens and clothing. There is not one shred of written proof that the Jews were ordered to die by gas chambers. As for the crematorium, we also do not argue that conditions in concentration camps were harsh, causing the death of many. Crematoriums were the most efficient way to dispose of the bodies who died naturally at the concentration camps."
Abstract This paper mainly discusses the idea of Holocaust denial and the people who follow this practice and how they support their ideas with the views of Deborah Lipstadt and her rebuttal.
From the paper:
""Modern Holocaust denial draws inspiration from a variety of sources" (Lipstadt 31). The Holocaust Deniers, or more appropriately called "revisionist" historians, and historians of the traditional school seem to differ greatly in their methodologies as shown when they use the same piece of evidence in two separate manners to come to two completely different conclusions."
Tags:deniers, holocaust, ii, lipstadt, revisionists, war, world
Abstract This paper examines the role of Hadith, traditions about Muhammad, in Islam. It clarifies the reasons for the importance of such traditions to Sunni Muslims and looks at one of the most lively and potentially liberating trends in contemporary Islam, the complete rejection of the religious value of Hadith.
From the Paper "The first problematic feature of hadith literature is precisely its casual, anecdotal nature. The hadith collections incorporate a large volume of material about the Prophet which varies from tales which are regarded ? even by most modern secular historians - as almost certainly authentic down to those which are regarded as highly improbable. Although Islamic scholars soon developed a "science" of hadith (riwayat) which seems admirable in comparison to the speculativeness which surrounds debate about the authenticity of traditions concerning Christ, the fact remains that the extant hadith collections date from a period as late as about a quarter of a millennium after Muhammed allegedly died. (I say "allegedly" because it is from the hadith literature itself that the Prophet's life dates are determined.)"
Abstract The paper relates that the word anti-Semitism was invented in the late 19th century as a more acceptable word than Jew-hatred. The paper discusses how the disease of anti-Semitism is irrational and seeking its origins is futile. The paper explains the difference between mild anti-Semitism and diabolical anti-Semitism and shows the history of anti-Semitism as manifested in Canadian life. The paper discusses how the days of anti-Semitism are not over for Canada; now we have Holocaust deniers, Neo-Nazis on the Internet and a steady increase in harassment of Jews.
From the Paper "The word anti-Semitism was invented in the late 19th century as a more acceptable word than Jew-hatred. It was meant to sound scientific, but actually there is no such thing as "Semitism." The word Semitic refers to a language group of which Aramaic (the language Jesus spoke), Hebrew, and Arabic are members. A Jewish historian defined anti-Semitism as "dislike of the unlike." Ages (1981) points out that there are nuances in the meaning of the word. It is possible, for example, to dislike Jews but be opposed to slaughtering them in concentration camps. In its most innocent form anti-Semitism is like the widespread prejudice found throughout the whole human race. It could be hostility after working for an unsympathetic Jew or a vague negativism from being taught to dislike them as a child."
