David Irving Jailed For 3 Years

[Kosmo]

The law in several european countries makes denial of holocaust a crime. This is stupid. Everybody is forced to believe something that they might not believe. In even more european countries having fascist beliefs or using fascist (not only nazi) simbols is a crime. The same it's in my country, but communism, that made many more victims here, is nowhere in this world forbidden and we can see the proud red flag of class genocide waving around and carried by ministers and parliament members in many european goverments.

 

On another theme, many men of Islam are trying to change the european way of life thru terror and pressure. Change your foreign policy or we will bomb your trains and buses! Chenge your constiutional principles about freedom of speach or we will attack your ambassies and help organisations! Change your social structure or we will burn your suburbs!

 

Remember the two killings of liberal dutch by fantical marocan. Those were political assasinations made by misfits in an open society with the purpose of silencing liberals.

The attitude of Europe towards this new era of conflict with Islam is too weak. Both within and outside.

US and Britain are reacting blindly and with worse effects, but at least they (and us) are doing something else then cower.

[M. Porcius Cato]

The law in several european countries makes denial of holocaust a crime. This is stupid. Everybody is forced to believe something that they might not believe. In even more european countries having fascist beliefs or using fascist (not only nazi) simbols is a crime. The same it's in my country, but communism, that made many more victims here, is nowhere in this world forbidden and we can see the proud red flag of class genocide waving around and carried by ministers and parliament members in many european goverments.

 

 

Exactly! And why weren't the Communists hauled up on charges of crimes against humanity? Why is Lenin's corpse--like a fish in a box--still on display in Red Square? Why can people deny the crimes of Pol Pot, or Mao, or Stalin? In fact, if every intellectual who denied Stalin's crimes (like Bertrand Russell) were in prison, half of the universities of the 1940s would be empty! Why are there memorials to the Holocaust all over the world, but none to be found for the victims of Stalin's orchestrated Great Famine or Mao's blood-soaked Cultural Revolution? Where are the Amnesty International fund-raisers for victims of class genocide????

 

OK, I'm done. But this issue REALLY gets me steamed.

[sullafelix]

I am intrigued by this thread. It strikes me that Austria's patently silly laws seem to be veering towards the sort of opression they are trying to atone for. I say atonement advisedly here, there is a general feeling of acute shame both in Germany and Austria. It is probably time we forgave them for what happened in the war (not forget mind you!). If we don't move on soon then I can see the neo-Nazi movements spreading. The more down you are on something, the more disaffected elements in society will back it and we run the danger of history one day repeating.

 

As for for that bloody stupid man and his academically unsound theories he should be allowed to say whatever he wants wherever and whenever he wanst to. Partly becuase it should be his right to say so and partly because otherwise we give him exactly what he wants - publicity.

 

The other thing about this thread is it is amazing watching the Brits and the Yanks going for each other on this whole thing.

 

I am an anti-war Brit...just to make my stance clear. I think it was ill-conceived and poorly executed. I think that Bush has done terrorism an immense service and Blair should climb off his lap and we should stop trying to be American and get back to being European. I also think that both our governments are just using terrorism as the big bad bogeyman to control us with, we los our freedoms bit by bit day by day, one day it is ID cards and CCTV and the next it is free speech when you are not allowed to preach hate (in a truly free and fair society there would be no-one to listen to the preacher). In Britain you now cannot denigrate anyones religion and that includes jokes...we no longer live in a democracy.

 

However, I am also appreciative of existence of the US and I understand the argument that if they are expected to do the policing of the world they should be able to have the main say in how they go about it. I disagree but I understand the case.

 

But what truly stuns me here is the concept that you guys think you still have free speech......it isn't governments that impose thought control on us it is pressure groups and the media. Politically correct speech is one of the most pernicious evils ever to be foisted upon us. Free speech is free speech.

 

Its not just Austria...its all of us the only way to maintain free speech is to damn well keep saying what you think...which is why this place is such a jolly good idea.

 

Spiffing...crumpet anyone? I only have few minutes before I go to the dentist to have my teeth yellowed!

 

Sulla Felix

 

Freedom is not a right it is a responsibility!

[M. Porcius Cato]

But what truly stuns me here is the concept that you guys think you still have free speech......it isn't governments that impose thought control on us it is pressure groups and the media. Politically correct speech is one of the most pernicious evils ever to be foisted upon us. Free speech is free speech.

I'm utterly opposed to politcal correctness and private speech codes, but there really is an enormous difference between those private sanctions and government-imposed ones.

The media and pressure groups are not exercising 'thought control' anymore than you are--they are attempting to persuade others, and anyone is free to argue back, disbelieve, ignore, whatever. And they frequently do. The important point is that the media (insofar as it is deregulated) does not speak with one voice--but the State does.

In my view, there is an enormous difference between a university firing Irving for his views (which is fine as far as I'm concerned) and the state putting him in jail for these views. If you don't think this difference matters, why don't you ask Irving for his opinion?

 

Its not just Austria...its all of us the only way to maintain free speech is to damn well keep saying what you think...which is why this place is such a jolly good idea.

 

I agree. Which is why I disagree.

[Virgil61]

...

Exactly! And why weren't the Communists hauled up on charges of crimes against humanity? Why is Lenin's corpse--like a fish in a box--still on display in Red Square? Why can people deny the crimes of Pol Pot, or Mao, or Stalin? In fact, if every intellectual who denied Stalin's crimes (like Bertrand Russell) were in prison, half of the universities of the 1940s would be empty! Why are there memorials to the Holocaust all over the world, but none to be found for the victims of Stalin's orchestrated Great Famine or Mao's blood-soaked Cultural Revolution? Where are the Amnesty International fund-raisers for victims of class genocide????

 

OK, I'm done. But this issue REALLY gets me steamed.

 

As far as the Soviet Union and Russians, go the dirty little secret is that much of the population were complicit in the crimes. Those millions that were sent to the Gulag weren't all arbitrarily picked up off the street due to a list from Stalin's office (although he loved to review and approve thousands of arrests). Countless numbers were given up by jealous neighbors, rivals, and for your benefit, not a few academics reported as spys, counter-revolutionaries and wreckers by their colleagues. One way to get that cherished departmental chair I suppose. Two of my closest friends, both Russians, one a researcher at Wake Forest Hospital and one a prof at UNC-Chapel Hill, are surprisingly ambilavent about the carnage and shake it off with 'that's life in Russia' shrug. Perhaps it's a sort of collective guilt that makes many Russians at least, not up in arms about it. Thankfully there some who feel otherwise.

 

Funny, when I lived in Kiev and worked at the US embassy for a few months in the early '90s there very few Ukrainians were much concerned about the Great Famine. They were more p*ssed off about the destruction of dozens of churches by Stalin and by association the Russians. Go figure.

Edited February 22, 2006 by Virgil61

[M. Porcius Cato]

As far as the Soviet Union and Russians, go the dirty little secret is that much of the population were complicit in the crimes. .... Two of my closest friends, both Russians, one a researcher at Wake Forest Hospital and one a prof at UNC-Chapel Hill, are surprisingly ambilavent about the carnage and shake it off with 'that's life in Russia' shrug. Perhaps it's a sort of collective guilt that makes many Russians at least, not up in arms about it.

 

Exactly--just like Hitler's willing executioners, Stalin had plenty of people with petty grudges and small minds to turn to. That's exactly why things like the Holocaust museum are needed--to remind people what happened, to defiantly state "Never Again", and to foster introspection instead of shrugging.

[P.Clodius]

...remind people what happened, to defiantly state "Never Again", and to foster introspection instead of shrugging.

Interesting...Anyone find parallels between the nazi concept of Liebensraum and Jeffersonian Manifest Destiny?

[sullafelix]

But what truly stuns me here is the concept that you guys think you still have free speech......it isn't governments that impose thought control on us it is pressure groups and the media. Politically correct speech is one of the most pernicious evils ever to be foisted upon us. Free speech is free speech.

I'm utterly opposed to politcal correctness and private speech codes, but there really is an enormous difference between those private sanctions and government-imposed ones.

The media and pressure groups are not exercising 'thought control' anymore than you are--they are attempting to persuade others, and anyone is free to argue back, disbelieve, ignore, whatever. And they frequently do. The important point is that the media (insofar as it is deregulated) does not speak with one voice--but the State does.

In my view, there is an enormous difference between a university firing Irving for his views (which is fine as far as I'm concerned) and the state putting him in jail for these views. If you don't think this difference matters, why don't you ask Irving for his opinion?

 

Its not just Austria...its all of us the only way to maintain free speech is to damn well keep saying what you think...which is why this place is such a jolly good idea.

 

I agree. Which is why I disagree.

 

I take your point and to an extent I agree, but UI am not dure that political correctness hasn't actually become more restricitng than a central government ban. I mean and this is a trivial example, but here in blighty many of our councils are banning things like the word Christmas from Christmas celebrations, our own University (can't say which one) had a tree of light this christmas and there is very much an air of saying only what is acceptable and not courting controversy. That sort of attitude in the private world has allowed our government to get through legislation on the restriction of free speech under the guise of being anti-terrorism...it's all nuts!

 

I think its probably a chicken and egg argument.

[M. Porcius Cato]

...remind people what happened, to defiantly state "Never Again", and to foster introspection instead of shrugging.

Interesting...Anyone find parallels between the nazi concept of Liebensraum and Jeffersonian Manifest Destiny?

 

"Manifest Destiny" didn't come from Jefferson. It came from a newspaper editor of the 19th century. The concept predates the 19th century to be sure, but the justifications for the Louisiana Purchase and the invasion of Czechoslovakia differed dramatically. (Regarding the "Trail of Tears", on the other hand...nevermind--let's get back to free speech or even better ancient Rome!)

[Kosmo]

Freedom is such an empty word when you're not allowed to voice your opinion about anything but movies, football and music.

Why hate is a tabu?

I hate communists and I will always do. Why is this a wrong thing to say? It's my attitude towrds a political ideology.

I don't want muslim imigrants in my country. It's this biased against a religious group? Yes, it is, but in life we use categories and this is one. They define themselves as muslims, I define them as unwnated neighbours. I dont say "kill them". I just say "stop them to came here!"

Why we have to worry to be politically correct while arabs and chinese can have goverment hate rallies? Selfcensorship reminds my so well of the times when Ceausescu was alive. But still then we called it dictatorship not democracy (politicians called it democracy as today politicians call it)

Sissified and bound to extinction we are.

Let's just dream a little bit more about the glory of Rome before we go.

I'm to disapointed to be rational and censor myself. Sorry.

[Chyhoedd da]

Is the Austrian Holocuast law wrong?

 

Yes.

 

Is Irving cry foul, or pleading innocence?

 

No.

 

Should Irving be pardoned?

 

No. he knew the law, he even talked to one of his friends before leaving about it ... forgert the exact lingo but he said something around the extent of "It would be jolly good fun" (He liked the risk)

 

Should it be illegal to say the Holocuast never existed?

 

No. By the way, do foriegners (I may me saying wrong stuff here) Such as those from Communist countries or those brought up by a perverted education system (usually totalarian) get persectued if they were never taught of holcuast ( I dont know if some countries dont teach this)? Or what if somebody was raised in on of the Neo-Nazi enclaves (America has those, like Nazi youth camps) ... would they be persecuted since they were tuaght incorrect information?

 

I know at the exposion of the camps, many Germans couldnt beleive it, they were oblivious (i said many, not all) .... did those who still not believe it 9perhaps because of Nationalism) get persectuted?

[Sextus Roscius]

No. By the way, do foriegners (I may me saying wrong stuff here) Such as those from Communist countries or those brought up by a perverted education system (usually totalarian) get persectued if they were never taught of holcuast ( I dont know if some countries dont teach this)? Or what if somebody was raised in on of the Neo-Nazi enclaves (America has those, like Nazi youth camps) ... would they be persecuted since they were tuaght incorrect information?

 

I know at the exposion of the camps, many Germans couldnt beleive it, they were oblivious (i said many, not all) .... did those who still not believe it 9perhaps because of Nationalism) get persectuted?

 

Good point, I doubt any of those people were persecuted for crimes on those charges.

 

Also if I may point out, one can classify any educational system as "perverted" , not just ones by those in history we consider "bad". In my town, the schools are almost obsessively leftist (we were among the top 3 most democraticly voting counties in the region I beleive) and I've been taught all my life tons of things that were only the positives or negatives. If some one was popularly beleived as bad where I lived. They would foucus hard core on the negatives bringing up the positives in passing statements which were ignored in the big picture. This did not however apply in a vice-versa manner.

 

I, by my standards, was brought up in a completely biased educational system and the only reason I'm not the same way as others is becuase I loved history from a young age and there for learned things on my own. I am to this day thought of in a negative way becuase I mention both good and bad about every thing we bring up. I'll give the bads about gandhi and the goods about hitler in a way thats not ignorant of other things they've done.

 

So, what I think might happen, is if we progress in this thought of prosecution of denial, perhaps we will eventualy (like what is sort of going on in my school to me) we will shun people for merely suggesting positives to a normaly negative thing. If I were to point out that the Nazi's did indeed profit off slave labour and it worked for them, and that the conflict was of ethics (the Nazi's being unethical to them, not having different ethics) then could I be prosecuted.

[Germanicus]

If I were to point out that the Nazi's did indeed profit off slave labour and it worked for them, and that the conflict was of ethics (the Nazi's being unethical to them, not having different ethics) then could I be prosecuted.

 

I think it's unlikely, but I see what you mean. In a sense the guy is just a historian with an opinion that everyone else thinks is wrong.

[Sextus Roscius]

In a sense the guy is just a historian with an opinion that everyone else thinks is wrong.

 

Exactly