Deborah Lipstadt continues to be a moronic FORGER and exposes her deep ignorance of FACTS by accusing Faurisson on her blog.
ZuLu
Faurisson as never been condemned by French court for being a "forger of history" as
she wrote.
On the opposite, a French court stated in the 80's that the work of Faurisson was
serious. That was too much for the usual holofolkies who didn't stop to pressure the
gov until the establishment of a new law in order to silent Faurisson on the French
medias. That is why that idiotic "Gayssot act" was voted.
In fact, recently Faurisson sued for defamation Badinter (former French minister of
justice) who called him of "falsifier of history" on a TV show and he WON.
However, Badinter had nothing to pay for compensation to Faurisson because the judge
considered that his defamation was "in good faith". LOL.
On her blog Deborah Lipstadt claims that "Robert Faurisson IS a "forger of history":
French court rules"
That simply means that Deborah is an idiot, a LIAR and a FORGER.
She falsifies what it happened at that trial.
<>
Robert Faurisson IS a "forger of history": French court rules
http://lipstadt.blogspot.com/2007/04/robert-faurisson-is-forger-of-history.html
<>
LOL. French court stated the OPPOSITE. What a moron that Lipstadt!
That affair by Faurisson himself
Three new examples of how �the law lies down in the conqueror�s bed�.
In the course of a discussion programme on the ARTE television channel last November,
Robert Badinter lied outright in saying that in 1981 he had won a court ruling
against me �for being a falsifier of history�. I therefore sued him for libel. On May
21, 2007, the 17th division of the Paris criminal court, presided by Nicolas Bonnal,
held that R. Badinter had indeed libelled me BUT � IN GOOD FAITH. In its own words,
the court declared: R. Badinter �failed to give convincing evidence� in support of
his assertion (p. 13 of the judgment) but �the justifying circumstance of good faith�
would be �acknowledged� for him (p. 16). Consequently I thus have to disburse 5,000
euros to R. Badinter for his lawyers� fees and pay court costs as well. Factors
beyond my control unfortunately make it impossible for me to lodge an appeal against
this villainous judgment (I shall shortly make plain what I mean both by �factors
beyond my control� and the term �villainous�).
Remarks that I had made during the Teheran conference on the �Holocaust� (December
11-12, 2006) prompted Jacques Chirac himself, then president of the French Republic,
to make my talk at that gathering a special matter for his justice minister, Pascal
Cl�ment. At the latter�s request, the prosecutor�s office in Paris opened an inquiry.
On April 16, 2007, police lieutenant S�verine Besse and her assistant, having made
the journey from Paris, questioned me at Vichy police station. In keeping with
custom, I refused to answer their questions, giving them my usual reply to put in
their books: �I refuse to collaborate with the French police and justice system in
the repression of historical revisionism�. Today, July 4, I learn from the news
agencies that on June 13 a formal investigation was assigned to examining magistrate
Marc Sommerer, who thus will not fail to summon me to Paris soon.
For an interview given over the telephone on February 3, 2005 to the Iranian
television channel Sahar 1, the same Paris court, the same Nicolas Bonnal presiding,
had sentenced me, on October 3, 2006, to three months� imprisonment (suspended) and a
fine of 7,500 euros, as well as ordering me to pay the lawyers� fees � 1,500 euros �
of each of the three organisations that had also brought civil cases against me at
the trial (LICRA, MRAP and LDH *). Today as well, the 11th division of the Paris
court of appeal, presided by Laurence Tr�bucq, has upheld that sentence, not without
adding on another 1,000 euros for each of the three organisations� legal fees; the
monetary sanctions in the matter of this single case thus amount to 15,000 euros.
All that without counting my own legal costs, my travel expenses, the various other
outlays, the work in preparing for these trials and the hearings themselves. But the
French revisionists are not to be grieved for if one compares their lot with that of
the German, Austrian, Belgian, Swiss or Canadian revisionists.
Robert FAURISSON
* LICRA, MRAP, LDH : French jewish organizations.
http://www.radioislam.org/faurisson/eng/fr-justice.htm
http://www.tellingfilms.co.uk/faurisson-badinter.htm
The good thing is to pick Deborah with the fingers in the pot of "biased
interpretation" marmalade. The kind of accusation she made against Irving to qualify
him of "dishonest" and bad historian.
So, Lipstadt is dishonest and a bad historian. She dares to make FALSE statements
based on a complete ignorance as well as a blatant misunderstanding of the FACTS.
I'll Always Be 27/10/09
<4ae8...@news.x-privat.org>,
ZuLu <Zu...@gloogloo.com> wrote:
> That idiot didn't remove her FALSE ASSERTION about Faurisson.
> Faurisson as never been condemned by French court for being a "forger of
> history" as
> she wrote.
> On the opposite, a French court stated in the 80's that the work of Faurisson
> was
> serious. That was too much for the usual holofolkies who didn't stop to
> pressure the
> gov until the establishment of a new law in order to silent Faurisson on the
> French
> medias. That is why that idiotic "Gayssot act" was voted.
>
> In fact, recently Faurisson sued for defamation Badinter (former French
> minister of
> justice) who called him of "falsifier of history" on a TV show and he WON.
>
> However, Badinter had nothing to pay for compensation to Faurisson because
> the judge
> considered that his defamation was "in good faith". LOL.
>
> On her blog Deborah Lipstadt claims that "Robert Faurisson IS a "forger of
> history":
> French court rules"
>
> That simply means that Deborah is an idiot, a LIAR and a FORGER.
Still having problems with the language,
I see.
Exactly what did she "forge"?
>
> She falsifies what it happened at that trial.
>
> <>
>
> Robert Faurisson IS a "forger of history": French court rules
>
> http://lipstadt.blogspot.com/2007/04/robert-faurisson-is-forger-of-history.htm
> l
>
> <>
>
> LOL. French court stated the OPPOSITE. What a moron that Lipstadt!
>
>
> That affair by Faurisson himself
>
>
> Three new examples of how �the law lies down in the conqueror�s bed�.
>
> In the course of a discussion programme on the ARTE television channel last
> November,
> Robert Badinter lied outright in saying that in 1981 he had won a court
> ruling
> against me �for being a falsifier of history�. I therefore sued him for
> libel. On May
> 21, 2007, the 17th division of the Paris criminal court, presided by Nicolas
> Bonnal,
> held that R. Badinter had indeed libelled me BUT � IN GOOD FAITH. In its own
> words,
> the court declared: R. Badinter �failed to give convincing evidence� in
> support of
> his assertion (p. 13 of the judgment) but �the justifying circumstance of
> good faith�
> would be �acknowledged� for him (p. 16). Consequently I thus have to disburse
> 5,000
> euros to R. Badinter for his lawyers� fees and pay court costs as well.
> Factors
> beyond my control unfortunately make it impossible for me to lodge an appeal
> against
> this villainous judgment (I shall shortly make plain what I mean both by
> �factors
> beyond my control� and the term �villainous�).
>
> Remarks that I had made during the Teheran conference on the �Holocaust�
> (December
> 11-12, 2006) prompted Jacques Chirac himself, then president of the French
> Republic,
> to make my talk at that gathering a special matter for his justice minister,
> Pascal
> Cl�ment. At the latter�s request, the prosecutor�s office in Paris opened an
> inquiry.
> On April 16, 2007, police lieutenant S�verine Besse and her assistant, having
> made
> the journey from Paris, questioned me at Vichy police station. In keeping
> with
> custom, I refused to answer their questions, giving them my usual reply to
> put in
> their books: �I refuse to collaborate with the French police and justice
> system in
> the repression of historical revisionism�. Today, July 4, I learn from the
> news
> agencies that on June 13 a formal investigation was assigned to examining
> magistrate
> Marc Sommerer, who thus will not fail to summon me to Paris soon.
>
> For an interview given over the telephone on February 3, 2005 to the Iranian
> television channel Sahar 1, the same Paris court, the same Nicolas Bonnal
> presiding,
> had sentenced me, on October 3, 2006, to three months� imprisonment
> (suspended) and a
> fine of 7,500 euros, as well as ordering me to pay the lawyers� fees � 1,500
> euros �
> of each of the three organisations that had also brought civil cases against
> me at
> the trial (LICRA, MRAP and LDH *). Today as well, the 11th division of the
> Paris
> court of appeal, presided by Laurence Tr�bucq, has upheld that sentence, not
> without
> adding on another 1,000 euros for each of the three organisations� legal
george
<aussies_s...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Still having problems with the language,
> I see.
>
> Exactly what did she "forge"?
Nothing.
Its just a nazi trying to deny the evil that his fellows perpetrated
on the Human Race.
The French lost many of their Jewish citizens to the nazi murderers
I'll Always Be 29/10/09
<70dbd662-578d-4558-9b6d-42c47919ff47@f1
8g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
george <gbl...@hnpl.net> wrote:
It's not "lost" but "sacrificed"
ZuLu
That is FALSE
Most of French jews weren't deported and 60% of deported were foreigners.
To compare, the amount of French civilians including women, children and old people
dead under allied bombings is nearby the same than all jews deported from France.
To be added more 20,000 who died under nazi bombs.
Moreover, the nazis didn't want to deport the children. That was the Jewish
associations which asked to do so, to not separate the families they said. They even
helped nazis to round up the ones who were hidden in French Christian families.
<zulu>
Until now we have only 1 source (Klarsfeld) to state the French Jewish deportation.
The numbers given are:
Jews deported from France
Total: 75 721 of whom 60% were foreigner refugees ( 26,000 Polish,
7,000 Germans, 4,500 Russian, 3,300 Romans, 2,500 Austrian, 1,500 Greek, 1,200
Hungarians.
In 1940, the estimated Jewish population was about 360,000 in France,
including 170,000 Jews in Occupied zone only (150,000 Parisian region, 20,000 rest).
Now, concerning non racial deportation 86.827 French (10% women)[*] were sent
to the nazis camps were they shared the same conditions of detention than their
Jewish companions as related by Gaston Pernot.
Those numbers don't includes about 650,000 French sent to Germany to forced
labor among a total of 1,2 millions required (STO, Service du Travail Obligatoire).
How much died in the camps?
Jewish people: the official story tells that as only 3% came back to France thus
97% must have been "gassed".
From 86.827 French deportees, 40% didn't go back.
Well, concerning the affirmation about "gassed number", may be some correction
has to be made if you consider the high proportion of Jews foreigners who had no
particular reason to come back to France.
And, about the others, we can reasonably deduce that "some" preferred to choose
another country to return. So, we have to wait for the complete compilation of Bad
Arolsen archives to know more about the actual fate of all those people. It seems
that nobody is interested in finding it out...
Furthermore, knowing the hard conditions of the camps, we can imagine that a
population including many old people and children would present much more
mortality than a stronger population of men in the force of their age like a
majority of non-racial deportees.
But if Jewish population presented a higher mortality that is not a reason to
forget what happened to the non Jews!
Do you ever know in USA that non Jews were deported from France to the nazis camps ?
So, there were more non Jews deported than Jews!!
Don't they deserve any "small" place in the History of the French deportation?
Obviously the non Jews victims don't share a proportional part in the French
media.
[*] Numbers established by a Research agreement between Caen's University (in
behalf of CRHQ - Centre de Recherches en Histoire Quantitative ) and the
Foundation to the Deportation's memory (FMD - Fondation pour la Memoire de la
Deportation ) signed on 28 November 28th, 1996.
http://www.crhq.cnrs.fr/axe1-sgm-deportation.html
http://www.fmd.asso.fr/web/index.php?id_contenu=52?=lang1
<zulu>
I'll Always Be 29/10/09
<4aea...@news.x-privat.org>,
ZuLu <Zu...@gloogloo.com> wrote:
> I'll Always Be 29/10/09 escribi�:
> > In article
> > <70dbd662-578d-4558-9b6d-42c47919ff47@f1
> > 8g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> > george <gbl...@hnpl.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Oct 29, 12:36 pm, I'll Always Be 27/10/09
> >> <aussies_s...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Still having problems with the language,
> >>> I see.
> >>>
> >>> Exactly what did she "forge"?
> >> Nothing.
> >> Its just a nazi trying to deny the evil that his fellows perpetrated
> >> on the Human Race.
> >> The French lost many of their Jewish citizens to the nazi murderers
> >
> > It's not "lost" but "sacrificed"
>
> That is FALSE
>
> Most of French jews weren't deported and 60% of deported were foreigners.
>
> To compare, the amount of French
> civilians including women, children
> and old people dead under allied
> bombings is nearby the same than all
> jews deported from France.
People die in a war. Some people call
that collateral damage and it's a sad
thing, but it is different from what
your countrymen did. The French allowed
the deportation of THEIR citizens...I
repeat, the French allowed the
deportation of THEIR citizens and I have
no doubt they knew full well what was in
store for them. I know that all of the
deportees weren't French citizens, but
that is no excuse.
>
> To be added more 20,000 who died under nazi bombs.
>
> Moreover, the nazis didn't want to
> deport the children. That was the
> Jewish associations which asked to do
> so, to not separate the families they
> said. They even helped nazis to round
> up the ones who were hidden in French
> Christian families.
I am not aware of this...and I really
don't believe the nazis didn't want the
children. Even if true, they would have
come for them later.
So tell us how many that was, otherwise
it is just pure conjecture
>
> And, about the others, we can
> reasonably deduce that "some"
> preferred to choose another country
> to return. So, we have to wait for
> the complete compilation of Bad
> Arolsen archives to know more about
> the actual fate of all those people.
> It seems that nobody is interested in
> finding it out...
Ah, that canard again.
>
> Furthermore, knowing the hard conditions of the camps, we can imagine that a
> population including many old people and children would present much more
> mortality than a stronger population of men in the force of their age like a
> majority of non-racial deportees.
But you can't prove that
>
> But if Jewish population presented a higher mortality that is not a reason to
> forget what happened to the non Jews!
You are trying to compare mortality with
murder. That anyone died from harsh
conditions is sad, that some were
singled out for special treatment
because of their race, religion, sexual
orientation or other attribute is
horrible.
>
> Do you ever know in USA that non Jews were deported from France to the nazis
> camps ?
I don't know what that sentence means
>
> So, there were more non Jews deported than Jews!!
And by your logic, more non-Jew survivors
>
> Don't they deserve any "small" place in the History of the French
> deportation?
Sad thing that the French don't wish to
acknowledge this, isn't it?
>
> Obviously the non Jews victims don't share a proportional part in the French
> media.
You have proof for this assertion? I
posit that the French are embarrassed by
what they did