[Rasczak]

Haven't seen this debated yet so thought I'd start a thread on it:

Irving admits Holocaust 'mistake'

...just interested in people's opinions really. Putting my own head above the parapet I think it's an outrage.

I have never read any of Irving's works - and from what has been said on the news/elsewhere it seems he has some non-conventional arguments that I strongly disagree with. And anyone who 'denies' the holocaust is, IMHO, a bit of an idiot.

But despite all this I honestly think it's a far worse crime to criminalise freedom of speech. Limitations to this fundamental right should be limited when inciting racial hatred or in other (extremely limited) circumstances. But this wasn't directly doing any of this: questioning history - however partisan and biased your arguments maybe - is criminal.

All that will be achieved by banning such topics is to force discussion underground where it will fester and grow into a cult. Better to have an open discussion whereby such foolish beliefs can be condemned by reason and evidence rather than by the iron rule of law

[vonhosen]

Originally Posted by Rasczak

Haven't seen this debated yet so thought I'd start a thread on it:

Irving admits Holocaust 'mistake'

...just interested in people's opinions really. Putting my own head above the parapet I think it's an outrage.

I have never read any of Irving's works - and from what has been said on the news/elsewhere it seems he has some non-conventional arguments that I strongly disagree with. And anyone who 'denies' the holocaust is, IMHO, a bit of an idiot.

But despite all this I honestly think it's a far worse crime to criminalise freedom of speech. Limitations to this fundamental right should be limited when inciting racial hatred or in other (extremely limited) circumstances. But this wasn't directly doing any of this: questioning history - however partisan and biased your arguments maybe - is criminal.

All that will be achieved by banning such topics is to force discussion underground where it will fester and grow into a cult. Better to have an open discussion whereby such foolish beliefs can be condemned by reason and evidence rather than by the iron rule of law

I agree (not with him with you)

[gazbarber]

Saying/publicising a fallicy as truth especialy without any actual evidence should get you sued but to stop you saying it? There are far worse things that you could say, and only the truly unhinged and ingorant would beleive such things, inwhich case they should be educated.

I would guess that he was using the "conspiricy" to promote racism and anti semetic (why do they get there own word?) views.

[Garrett]

Quote Holocaust denial is a criminal offence.
As above, he’s wrong but its anyone’s privilege to deny it. To make it a crime smacks of the thought police.

[FruitBat]

I'm mystified by this. I always thought the bloke was well known to be a bit of a pillock. Surely it's enough just to show the facts and reveal him for the idiot he is.

[JohnG]

I think the reason for the prison sentence is that Austria has laws against Holocaust Denial, so it is an offence to deny that it happened. The following is taken from the BBC News website:-

"Irving was arrested in Austria in November, on a warrant dating back to 1989, when he gave a speech and interview denying the existence of gas chambers at Auschwitz"

[MartinImber]

He appears to me to be a total pillock who will be his own undoing.

Just being a laughing stock is probably enough

[Londondecca]

Irving had a good career as a historian and published some interesting work but then seemed to let his own political views destroy his reputation.

The only decent argument he presented in Court was that it is still impossible to conduct new research into the holocaust which varies in anyway from the conventional beliefs. Of course, denying the holocuast was an act of gross stupidity

Idiot. Who the hell tries to deny something which overwhelming evidence PROVES happened?

Deserves everything he gets.

[FruitBat]

Originally Posted by shadowritten

Idiot. Who the hell tries to deny something which overwhelming evidence PROVES happened?

Deserves everything he gets.

I agree with you that he's an idiot. And I understand how denial of the holocaust would cause offence (especially to survivors). But does denying something really deserve a prison sentence? Some people assert that the world is flat.

[FruitBat]

I was reminded of a quotation that I couldn't quite remember. Google gives various possiblilties (can't trust the internet), so I checked the old-fashioned way (Oxford Dictionary Of Quotations, Third Edition)

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it

(Attr. to Voltaire in S.G. Tallentyre, The Friends Of Voltaire (1907))

[Monty Burns]

Originally Posted by FruitBat

I agree with you that he's an idiot. And I understand how denial of the holocaust would cause offence (especially to survivors). But does denying something really deserve a prison sentence? Some people assert that the world is flat.

Agreed.

Whilst the holocaust as we all know, did exist and happen, everyone should have the right to question everything. No matter how painfull, ignorant or uttely stupid that maybe.

As you said, the world was flat until someone questioned it... and I bet he was a laughing stock! (mind you, didn't do us anygood did it )

[JohnG]

I don't think he had any right to visit that country and blatantly challenge it's laws like he did. It's an offence to deny the holocaust in a few countries and this idiot knew that before he went there to give a speech and an interview to say that there's no evidence to support that it occurred. How many times do people in this country say that "people coming here should abide by our laws" - the same must be obeyed if you go to Austria surely ?
He changed his story only to try and get out of trouble as far as I'm concerned and is not an historian but is a right wing Neo Nazi.

[Miyazaki]

Hopefully the 3 years he got will give him some perspective. Hopefully he will make friends with an enormous Austrian called Fritz who will treat him like a loving prison husband.

[Ian J]

Originally Posted by Games Guru

Hopefully the 3 years he got will give him some perspective. Hopefully he will make friends with an enormous Austrian called Fritz who will treat him like a loving prison husband.

Originally Posted by Games Guru

I really wanted to concentrate on the debate between the erosion of civil liberties vs safety of British citizens.

IMHO freedom should be have no compromises, there is not one civil liberty worth giving up

[Miyazaki]

There is no difference between the awful displays by muslims in london, the danish press, and now this Irving bloke.

I condemn them all, as I have before. I don't know of any civil liberty that includes being able to humiliate any other culture or religion.

[Bat-man]

I don't know of any civil liberty that includes being able to humiliate any other culture or religion.

I agree, but many cultures, including the UK, has and still does 'humiliate' sections of our society with impunity.

[Jenn]

Surely a better punishement would have been to force the guy to learn about concentration camps, take him there and show him, make him talk to survivors etc.

And then force him to teach others why he was wrong and what the true story is.

3 years in jail for something he said apparently 20 years ago is a bit OTT in my opinion. Murderers sometimes get out after 3 years !

And the law is also a bit strange in my opinion because it would prevent anyone from questionning this period in history, ever. There's no doubt horrible things happened but if anyone today was looking to get the exact numbers etc. could end up in jail for saying that there might have been 3 millions instead of 6.

[NicolasB]

It's a tricky one, this. On the one hand, discussing alternative interpretations of historical evidence ought, in general, to be allowed. But, on the other hand, if someone says "the holocaust never happened", what are the implications of that statement? All of the jews claiming that many millions of their fellow jews were murdered are lying about it? The Nazi regime in Germany were actually perfectly nice people and had a lot of good ideas? Either of those suggestions seems to me to go well beyond what is acceptable under the principle of "freedom of speech".

[Bat-man]

Evolution is a lie!
Well, that's the kind of nonsense they are teaching children in some schools in the USA.

[gazbarber]

The german nazi governemt did have a lot of good ideas, like using acorns for coffe and fuel substitutes, the way they totaly turned germany from a crumbling ruin to a industrial power house in a few short years was astounding (and this is before they started the land grab). Unforuntily the nutty leaders and the unltimate aim of war that drove the thing was far worse, so altough they had good ideas the political motivation was well 'evil'.

[pingu]

Originally Posted by Jenn

Surely a better punishement would have been to force the guy to learn about concentration camps, take him there and show him, make him talk to survivors etc.

And then force him to teach others why he was wrong and what the true story is.

That really is the thought police: 2+2 = 5. Better to show him as the idiot he his. He lost his libel case and ruined himself financially - that showed him for what he is.

I agree with John G. He said things in Austria that he knew would land him in hot water (the law has been in place since '47?) therefore he can't be suprised by the consequences.

[pingu]

Originally Posted by Bat-man

Evolution is a lie!
Well, that's the kind of nonsense they are teaching children in some schools in the USA.

I know - frightening isn't it? But, on the other hand, it's their right to hold a belief however misguided we may think it is and we can only hope to persuade them differently.

[Bat-man]

Originally Posted by pingu

I know - frightening isn't it? But, on the other hand, it's their right to hold a belief however misguided we may think it is and we can only hope to persuade them differently.

Yes, but is it their right to prevent the teaching of evolution in schools?

[Jenn]

Originally Posted by pingu

That really is the thought police: 2+2 = 5.

I would call it education rather.

If someone is adament that the earth is flat, showing him that it really is circle isn't thought police but education.

Originally Posted by JohnG

I don't think he had any right to visit that country and blatantly challenge it's laws like he did. It's an offence to deny the holocaust in a few countries and this idiot knew that before he went there to give a speech and an interview to say that there's no evidence to support that it occurred. How many times do people in this country say that "people coming here should abide by our laws" - the same must be obeyed if you go to Austria surely ?
He changed his story only to try and get out of trouble as far as I'm concerned and is not an historian but is a right wing Neo Nazi.

Perfectly put.

[gazbarber]

Originally Posted by Bat-man

Evolution is a lie!
Well, that's the kind of nonsense they are teaching children in some schools in the USA.

I think this one is as likely as any

http://www.venganza.org/

Also there are some more 'facts' to back things up
http://www.topfive.com/flyingspaghettimonster.shtml

This latter is meant as a joke so if you’re a strong believer in the old and new testament then just shrug it off.

The former is an exercise in stopping nonsense from being taught in our schools (well american), and if the nonsense that one group of people want to preach is taught, then why not teach them something equality as nonsensical but that is also bit of fun (to highlight the first bit of nonsense).

A belief should only be taught in science classes if there is significant evidence to support that belief (not just lots of people that have the same view yet based on no evidence), not something based on magic/divinity or any other as of yet improvable or examinable phenomenon. Science does not teach blind faith

[NicolasB]

Originally Posted by pingu

I know - frightening isn't it? But, on the other hand, it's their right to hold a belief however misguided we may think it is and we can only hope to persuade them differently.

Yeah, but again, I don't think freedom of speech should extent to the freedom to teach children in schools things that aren't actually correct.

[pingu]

Originally Posted by Jenn

I would call it education rather.

If someone is adament that the earth is flat, showing him that it really is circle isn't thought police but education.

You can lead a horse to water... If someone doesn't want to believe something, you can't make them. You're assuming that he's reasonable but he isn't; I'm sure many historians have tried to educate him in the past. In the end you have to give him up as a lost cause.

In this country I think he'd have faded into obscurity remembered only as being an utter berk. But he has to face the consequences of the law he broke in Austria, right or wrong.

[Jenn]

Originally Posted by pingu

You can lead a horse to water... If someone doesn't want to believe something, you can't make them. You're assuming that he's reasonable but he isn't; I'm sure many historians have tried to educate him in the past. In the end you have to give him up as a lost cause.

In this country I think he'd have faded into obscurity remembered only as being an utter berk. But he has to face the consequences of the law he broke in Austria, right or wrong.

Oh I wasn't saying he'd end up believing it for sure but in front of an holocaust survivor he'd probably have problems telling the person that he/she didn't suffer and that gas chambers were just his/her imagination.

If after seeing it with his own eyes he still believed it was made up then indeed he's a lost cause and prison wouldn't change him either.