Jump to content

Holocaust Denier Irving Freed

Recommended Posts

According to BBC news, David Irving who was sentenced to two years in an Austrian prison for denying the holocaust is to be released from prison on probation. Should he have been released or should the sentence been extended as some argued? Furthermore, is it time for Britain to have 'holocaust denial' legislation?

 

 

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6196073.stm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imprisoning someone for expressing an opinion sounds like the sort of thing Nazis would do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my view he should never have been sentenced in the first place, because there should be no such law.

 

However wrong our opinions may be, we should have a right to hold and express them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He shouldn't have been imprisoned for having an opinion, and as far as i can see he wasn't. he was jailed for stating as fact the the holocaust didnt happen against all the evidence that it did

 

as for his new crusade

 

Quote. He said he would urge an academic boycott of historians from Germany and Austria until the nations stopped jailing historians.

 

why does he want to boycott proper historians is it because he isn't one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with just about everything the man says and stands for, but would defend to the end his right to say and stand for what he likes.

To imprison someone for their beliefs, however mis-judged and wrong, is an infringement of their human rights.:rant: :rant:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are the countries that currently have 'holocaust denial' legislation

Austria

Belgium

Czech Republic

France

Germany

Israel

Lithuania

Poland

Romania

Slovakia

Switzerland

 

Should Britain join this list?

 

I feel uneasy about imprisoning people for expressing their beliefs...although curiously at the trial Irving denied saying any of the things he was accused of saying ...that says it all for me.

 

There are 6 to 9 million people in the twentieth century who were unable to voice their opinion. People such as Irving will never again go round saying that the holocaust did not exist...that is the point of the legislation. You cannot make you grubby living on the backs of six million unarmed men, women and children who were murdered in cold blood. If you do, then if proved so...off to prison. That seems morally justified to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He shouldn't have been imprisoned for having an opinion, and as far as i can see he wasn't. he was jailed for stating as fact the the holocaust didnt happen against all the evidence that it did

 

as for his new crusade

 

Quote. He said he would urge an academic boycott of historians from Germany and Austria until the nations stopped jailing historians.

 

why does he want to boycott proper historians is it because he isn't one

 

I think we ought to be careful though about setting too fine a distinction between 'proper' historians and the rest. To give an example, during the Cold War the historian Robert Conquest wrote several works about the persecution and mass murder of many millions of Soviet citizens (not least in Ukraine) during the Stalin years. Many of the statistics and estimates of numbers he cited were regarded as gross exaggerations by many other historians (in particular, those of leftist persuasion). However, since the end of the Cold War, further evidence has come to light which proves that Conquest was right all along.

 

I hasten to add that I am not drawing any parallels here with the disputes about the Holocaust, but am instead counselling caution in relation to the putative distinction between 'proper' historians and the rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to write anything in support of this disgusting man but no, there is no moral or human rights justification for locking him up. What purpose does it serve? He ain't gonna change his mind is he?

 

OTOH he knew the law when he did what he did and got what was coming to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He should never have been imprisoned. Stupidity is not a crime in my book, maybe a little psychiatric help would be more fitting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
These are the countries that currently have 'holocaust denial' legislation

Austria

Belgium

Czech Republic

France

Germany

Israel

Lithuania

Poland

Romania

Slovakia

Switzerland

 

Should Britain join this list?

 

I feel uneasy about imprisoning people for expressing their beliefs...although curiously at the trial Irving denied saying any of the things he was accused of saying ...that says it all for me.

 

There are 6 to 9 million people in the twentieth century who were unable to voice their opinion. People such as Irving will never again go round saying that the holocaust did not exist...that is the point of the legislation. You cannot make you grubby living on the backs of six million unarmed men, women and children who were murdered in cold blood. If you do, then if proved so...off to prison. That seems morally justified to me.

 

If you play this numbers game, then you would have to add to the total you cite the millions of Armenians, Soviet citizens, Chinese, Cambodians, Rwandans, among many other ethnic groups, slaughtered in the 20th century. Our study of history would become another branch of law. Moreover, the countries which have this legislation tend to have authoritarian traditions of one kind or another, involving various restrictions on free speech. I don't think we ought to follow them down this path.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

whatever his reasons for saying the holocaust didnt happen( nazi sympathiser, anti semetic or any of the other reasons) he stated it as fact. not as an opinion

 

this is not two academics arguing over what killed off the dinosaurs where they both have evidence to back up their points of views, this is something that has happened in living memory some of the people that lived through this are still alive, when the allied forces libetrated places like Auschwitz had film cameras that showed the crematoriums that also showed the shower houses and Zyclon B gas that was used to murder innocent people for nothing other than being jewish, homosexual or not one of the 'master race'

the evidence that the holocaust actually happened is overwhelming

 

the laws in the countries named are there to make sure people who have thoughts of painting the nazi regime as harmless are not able to

 

i would like to see this country have this law

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
whatever his reasons for saying the holocaust didnt happen( nazi sympathiser, anti semetic or any of the other reasons) he stated it as fact. not as an opinion

 

 

You appear to have a quite touching faith in the distinction between 'fact' and 'opinion'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.