David Irving sentenced to 3 years (1 Viewer)

[spiritualtramp]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4733820.stm

This is utter nonsense. Irving has said himself he now does not believe what he said 17 years ago.

Whilst I have no love for holocaust deniers I totally disagree with locking them up.

 

[IFF]

i agree with you (and every point you made)

though it's actually a really hard issue on the whole

similar but the complete opposite (if that makes sense. both freedom of speech iossues, both disagree with the govt in prosecuting countries laws but ones denying a holocaust and the others saying a genocide happened)with the Orhan Pamuk case in Turkey i feel

what is funny is that some of his own books (Irvings) are in the prison library that he was sent to upon arrest.

 

[Franco]

Strange. Was only watching 'Manufactured Consent' last night on itv4 and the whole 'Chomsky supporting holocaust denier' issue cropped up in it. Chomsky was defending his right to say these things, if not backing what the guy was actually on about.

But considering the hot water chomsky got into, it's no surprise that most of the institutional intelligensia steer well clear of it the topic. which means there's no real debate on the issue.

is mocking the holocaust the western equivalent of caricaturing Mohommad?

 

[Napalm]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4733820.stm

This is utter nonsense. Irving has said himself he now does not believe what he said 17 years ago.

Whilst I have no love for holocaust deniers I totally disagree with locking them up.

Don;t forget to add to the equation that a nazi will deprive you of free speech first chance they get.

 

[niallmc]

Don;t forget to add to the equation that a nazi will deprive you of free speech first chance they get.

so should those who believe in free speech act the same?
I hate many of the things that are said in this forum (especially the No Way, Referee part) but don't rush out to delete them

 

[Jerry Twig]

Irving has said himself he now does not believe what he said 17 years ago.

oh, that's that then. you believe him?

irving is an idiot because he KNEW the law in Austria, however excessive it may seem, and he knew that if he set foot in austria he would be prosecuted for something he said 17 years ago, so lock him up for being so fuckin stupid, thats what i say.

 

[Latex lizzie]

think of all the idiots he has inspired to commit hate crimes over the years, most neo nazis have him held up as a kind of icon.huzzah i say.if you live by the sword etc....

 

[La La]

This is utter nonsense. Irving has said himself he now does not believe what he said 17 years ago.

why though?
why shouldn't he be held accountable for what he said? it's an easy cop-out to say that he doesnt believe what he did then. that's not really the issue; he was wanted in austria for those comments in 1989 and has been wanted there ever since. by re-entering the country, it was inevitable that he would have to face the music.
i do think three years seems alot; however i think it's good that germany and austria decided to crack down.
the holocaust was one of the most disgusting examples of human behaviour. the evidence to prove that it happened is indubitable. people who come forward and deny its existence (and systematic extermination of some 6 million people) should have to pay some sort of price.
i agree with you that holocaust deniers = bad people. but i do think there should be some sort of retribution.

I totally disagree with locking them up.

so what do you suggest they do?

 

[La La]

(yes, i know the law in question is an old one, thanks BTH )

 

[spiritualtramp]

think of all the idiots he has inspired to commit hate crimes over the years, most neo nazis have him held up as a kind of icon.huzzah i say.if you live by the sword etc....

Is there any actual evidence that these idiots were inspired by Irving? Most thicko racists I've encountered don't seem to be the book learning type.

I'd be a lot more concerned at people who are aware of the holocaust, believe it happened and think it was a great buzz.

 

[Jerry Twig]

(yes, i know the law in question is an old one, thanks BTH )

most welcome. sorry

 

[La La]

I'd be a lot more concerned at people who are aware of the holocaust, believe it happened and think it was a great buzz.

true and all........


but what about 'intellectuals' like Irving who, despite overwhelming hard evidence, try and convince people that it never happened?

i think that's almost more insulting

 

[spiritualtramp]

i do think three years seems alot; however i think it's good that germany and austria decided to crack down.

I'd much prefer they investigated their own citizens that bottle foreigners rather than lock one person up for a speech he made 17 years ago and now regrets it.

the holocaust was one of the most disgusting examples of human behaviour. the evidence to prove that it happened is indubitable.

people who come forward and deny its existence (and systematic extermination of some 6 million people) should have to pay some sort of price.
i agree with you that holocaust deniers = bad people. but i do think there should be some sort of retribution.

OK then, next on the lets imprison people for disagreeing with history list: Lunatic left wingers that deny the gulags existed. Just as many people died in gulags and there are political parties who openly deny this as it doesn't fit with their stalinist thing. Why can't they be cracked down on? Then can we can we arrest those who deny the moon landings? Or how about people that think that 9/11 was an inside job? I find that pretty offensive. Lock them all up!

so what do you suggest they do?

I suggest that people present the silly holocaust deniers with the millions of pieces of evidence that the holocaust happened, thus making their claims look like utter foolish. Locking people up for denying history just turns them into martyrs for rightwingers.

 

[La La]

OK then, next on the lets imprison people for disagreeing with history list: Lunatic left wingers that deny the gulags existed. Just as many people died in gulags and there are political parties who openly deny this as it doesn't fit with their stalinist thing. Why can't they be cracked down on? Then can we can we arrest those who deny the moon landings? Or how about people that think that 9/11 was an inside job? I find that pretty offensive. Lock them all up!

.

it was obvious the debate would take this turn and no, i dont agree with gulag deniers either. but we're talking about Irving, and in order to prevent tangents, (because there's potential for hundreds here) i figure it would be easier to discuss this case because its current!


also........
comparing landing on the moon to genocide????????


anyway if i can get back to the original point here; the law stated that if someone made comments of this nature about the holocaust, they would be dealt with. that law existed before irving spoke.

pleading ignorance to the law or saying 'well i dont mean it 17 years later' doesnt mean a thing i the eyes of the law. and so off he goes to jail. stringent? perhaps. but the law was there, and he knew about it

 

[spiritualtramp]

it was obvious the debate would take this turn and no, i dont agree with gulag deniers either. but we're talking about Irving, and in order to prevent tangents, (because there's potential for hundreds here) i figure it would be easier to discuss this case because its current!

But do you not think locking someone up shows a society has something to fear about the "criminal"? What is to be feared about holocaust deniers,they spout total nonsense. if people are educated they won't believe the nonsense and any historian can prove them wrong zillions of times.

One major lesson from the holocaust is don't ban books and locking up people for their beliefs is wrong.

also........
comparing landing on the moon to genocide????????

Oh yeah, like I think the two are on the scale, don't I?

Both are examples of people refusing to believe facts as they don't fit their agenda.

 

[La La]

Oh yeah, like I think the two are on the scale, don't I?

Both are examples of people refusing to believe facts as they don't fit their agenda.

i just felt you were alluding to it irrelevently is all. denying genocide and denying the advancement of the space program (or something along the lines of it, for example) are two completely different cases. of course i dont think that you genuinely believe it, but it's not in any way on the same scale as shoah revisionism.
people are disbelievers about alot of things, but you cross a line when you publicly deny mass genocide

 

[billygannon]

Personally I think 3 years is a bit draconian. Maybe a year. He's definitely gone back on his statement back then.

One of the points Irving made since that denial in 1989 was that a number of deaths in the concentration camps were probably brought about through disease. This doesn't sound very far-fetched to me. It doesn't justify concentration camps, or deny their existence.
That said, I don't know if he said most of the victims of concentration camps died from disease.

There's no denying the millions of academic papers that will be generated from this.

 

[shitepipe]

well, the main question is, does the holocaust deserve special treatment amongst all other historical events in that it is not possible to go outside the official line of events.
i would say no. therefore, irvine shouldnt be in prison.
if you you want to refute his arguments, then you just present the better evidence to show that it did happen, like in all reasonable debate.

 

[oh shit]

i agree with you that holocaust deniers = bad people. but i do think there should be some sort of retribution.

how many times on this forum have you glorified rioters and people attacking police? you wouldn't like a law banning that. nor would i for that matter.
yeah i know it's not the same subject and neither is the moon landing, but you can't use liberal principles [ie genocide is bad] to justify illiberal laws.

retribution = punishment to fit the crime
is three years in prison fitting for making revisionist speeches?

 

[1000smurfs]

i reckon they should give him a choice

3 years in prison

OR

read out the following statement in public and live on TV

I am an Idiot. I apologise for peddling bullshit in the past. I have been discredited by proper historians. To all the idiots who have made me an icon cop yourselves on and read the following books, visit the holocaust museums.

I'd be with the pro free speech people though. I think the Muslims have a valid criticism that europe has double standards in this case.

I think the whole no platform for facists thing is a dangerous game. By making it subversive you glamorise it.
Better to fight stupidity with education and satire rather than facisim.