History for Christchurch Rangers

Interesting talk.

However The whole "holocaust denier" aspect has been twisted in my opinion. Now anyone who asks questions outside of the officially accepted holocaust narrative is called a :"holocaust denier and is immediately tarred and feathered as a neo nazi etc ". Is that really a fair label?

To deny something is to say it did not happen at all and thats very different from questioning something or looking into something a little closer and drawing your own conclusions.

If someone says there was no holocaust then sure call them a holocaust denier but if someone asks questions about the holocaust or has some doubts over some areas regarding what happened then I really don't see a problem. All history should be open to critical scrutiny and debate...even the holocaust.

The whole idea of making it illegal to discuss the holocaust outside of the accepted narrative is bizarre.

I much prefer open discussion, as the truth will always shine truth anyhow.

Interesting talk.

However The whole "holocaust denier" aspect has been twisted in my opinion. Now anyone who asks questions outside of the officially accepted holocaust narrative is called a :"holocaust denier and is immediately tarred and feathered as a neo nazi etc ". Is that really a fair label?

To deny something is to say it did not happen at all and thats very different from questioning something or looking into something a little closer and drawing your own conclusions.

If someone says there was no holocaust then sure call then a holocaust denier but if someone asks questions about the holocaust or has some doubts over some areas regarding what happened then I really don't see a problem. All history should be open to critical scrutiny and debate...even the holocaust.

The whole idea of making it illegal to discuss the holocaust outside of the accepted narrative is bizarre. 

Interesting talk.

However The whole "holocaust denier" aspect has been twisted in my opinion. Now anyone who asks questions outside of the officially accepted holocaust narrative is called a :"holocaust denier and is immediately tarred and feathered as a neo nazi etc ". Is that really a fair label?

To deny something is to say it did not happen at all and thats very different from questioning something or looking into something a little closer and drawing your own conclusions.

If someone says there was no holocaust then sure call then a holocaust denier but if someone asks questions about the holocaust or has some doubts over some areas regarding what happened then I really don't see a problem. All history should be open to critical scrutiny and debate...even the holocaust.

The whole idea of making it illegal to discuss the holocaust outside of the accepted narrative is bizarre. 

Interesting talk.

However The whole "holocaust denier" aspect has been twisted in my opinion. Now anyone who asks questions outside of the officially accepted holocaust narrative is called a :"holocaust denier". Is that really a fair label?

To deny something is to say it did not happen at all and thats very different from questioning something or looking into something a little closer and drawing your own conclusions.

If someone says there was no holocaust then sure call then a holocaust denier but if someone asks questions about the holocaust or has some doubts over some areas regarding what happened then I really don't see a problem. All history should be open to critical scrutiny and debate...even the holocaust.

The whole idea of making it illegal to discuss the holocaust outside of the accepted narrative is bizarre.