BS: David Irving goes to prison.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Peace
Date: 06 Mar 06 - 10:25 AM

Irving perverted and distorted history to serve a twisted ideology. He will now serve some time in the name of that twisted ideology. However, he is not a martyr except to a few fringe folks, because it's difficult to design a picture frame for hatred, stupidity and ignorance.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: GUEST,clogger
Date: 06 Mar 06 - 10:19 AM

The only problem with that law is that it may have the opposite effect to the reason it was made.
You can just immagine, in the depths of the BMP recruitment department, the conversation going something like this.....
" Now then dont get me wrong, it was a war an' like bad things are done. But dont forget winners write the history. And we arnt sure it happend anyway.... oh I know everyone says it did but there are some historins who dont think that it did, and they were forced to shut up! I mean just look at what happend to that David Irvine! He ended up in jail just for saying he was not sure! I mean the bastards arer controlling you. You can't even express your own opinion in your own country any more."

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Roughyed
Date: 05 Mar 06 - 02:27 PM

Let's not forget Irving's own commitment to free speech - suing someone for libel when they correctly described him as a Holocaust denier. Hoist by his own petard, I'd say.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Wolfgang
Date: 05 Mar 06 - 01:48 PM

thats a very odd way of working a law out (stevenrailing)

In my eyes, it would be odd to make laws without any regard for the context. After the war, we had also a special law passed to integrate the invalids into the work force (and some more war invalid laws). There were lots of people with one limb missing, more than usually in a country. That law too has been adapted later when the situation had changed (i.e. youngest war invalids older than retirement age).

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 04 Mar 06 - 04:23 PM

It bears more relevance to actual people than many laws in existence now with no 'sell by' date, which will still exist in many years time steven.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: GUEST,stevenrailing
Date: 04 Mar 06 - 03:40 PM

oh right. thats a very odd way of working a law out.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Wolfgang
Date: 04 Mar 06 - 12:10 PM

Why fifty?

Because in fifty years the youngest survivor with a memory of what has happened will be 114 years old.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: GUEST,stevenrailing
Date: 03 Mar 06 - 03:45 AM

In fifty years from now, we can scrap that law. Until then it will stay.

You see, this remark is the type that baffles me. No offence.

Why fifty years? Why set a time-span for this unique law? Out of respect for that generation? Is that how laws are determined? That same generation fought for freedom, and yet in their defence, that freedom has now corroded with recent events, irving included.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Wolfgang
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 12:44 PM

equally we could say the purge of gulags should not be repeated? Of course, but would we, on here, really agree to imprisoning a man who said the purge of gulags never occured? (stevenrailing)

Others have made similar points, just as wrong in my eyes.

This argumentation disregards the context. If one looks at this and similar laws one sees that they tend be passed in the countries in which such crimes have happened and in which the survivors are still haunted by the worst of memories.

Guess which is the only country in the world in which denying the genocide of the Tutsi is forbidden by law. Rwanda, of course.

Such laws in those countries that have seen the atrocities and have still survivors make more sense than in unrelated countries for two reasons: (1) To prevent the events happening again and (2) to protect the feelings of the survivors.

If someone in Germany would deny that the arrival of the Whites in America has led to a decline of the indigenous populations of a genocidal dimension, he would be considered an idiot but not put in jail. Neither a repetition in Germany nor a slight of the survivors' feelings is to be feared.

To those living in countries in which the holocaust did not happen, this may be just another of many genocides. I even can see that when I try to view it from your point. But for us it feels completely different. It was the genocide of/by our fathers' generation.

In fifty years from now, we can scrap that law. Until then it will stay.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Peace
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 10:28 AM

No problem, steve. BTW, Giok is a really good guy.

"Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it."

The best 'response I ever hear to that line: "History repeats itself because historians repeat each other."

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: freda underhill
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 05:51 AM

are you sure it wasn't a Fredian slip Giok? :-)

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: alanabit
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 05:30 AM

Good point Steve, but it is possible for people to delude themselves about the Gulags, however unreasonable that might seem. (I don't think it is reasonable either). However, it is barely credible that any adult can have failed to receive some information about the Holocaust. There simply is not any excuse for pretending that it did not happen. The other issue, is the fact that although the Stalinist agenda has effectively gone the way of the dodo, the Nazi ideal is very much alive and kicking (and literally handing out kickings) in many parts of Europe.
I would say that what I am debating with you and Peter K, is whether we can draw a line between freedom of speech and the abuse of it to to try to make blatant untruths acceptable. It is not an easy one to call. I am leaning towards those who wish to draw a line.
To the credit of Peter and yourself, you wish to guarantee absolute freedom of speech to even those, whom you detest. That is fair enough. Now we are on the thorny issue of whether the absolute right to free speech also guarantees the absolute right to scream lies. The debate is still open.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: GUEST,stevenrailing
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 05:05 AM

yes but equally we could say the purge of gulags should not be repeated? Of course, but would we, on here, really agree to imprisoning a man who said the purge of gulags never occured?

Peace, understood, my apologies in turn for my rather sharp response.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 04:09 AM

I believe it was the philosopher George Santayana who said.........

Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

I am also reminded of the words of Neville Chamberlain when he came back from Munich after talks with Adolf Hitler, and securing the 1938 Munich agreement later described as a policy of appeasement.
He said something to the effect that he had in his hand a piece of paper signed by Herr Hitler, guaranteeing peace in out time.

Oh how we laughed!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 03:20 AM

I think the problem with Nazism is this.

It doesn't need to win arguments. When it gets any kind of presence - not even a significant presence in democratic election terms -it causes a strange sort of trouble.

It gives people an excuse to behave badly. And once it starts, then people who never even knew they wanted to behave badly locate that zeitgeist within themselves. Sudddenly all the things like sadism and racial hatred, that are probably lurking deep within us all - they get a chance to come to the surface.

its just really f---ing bad stuff, and presents a unique threat human society at our present stage of development.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 09:14 PM

Peace - it must never be forgotten, neither must the consequences, or we will go thru it all again.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Peace
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 07:48 PM

"shit that happens when people pretend that nazism is an essential part of the spectrum of opinions that needs representation"

Just wanted to ensure that that gets read.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 07:47 PM

what's the next thing.... freedom of polio bacteria to flourish and set up their own communities? Freedom of shit to float in the water supply.....

Well they can't be compared to the human situation. Although at times it feels like they can...

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 07:32 PM

well if you aren't frightened of Nazis, Peter - maybe YOU missed something.

and perhaps I'm a wee little soul compared to your lofty ideals of freedom - but my Dad spent five years in a tank sorting out the mess caused by the last load of people who thought that nazis are a phenomena that could be tolerated. And that made him one of the lucky ones, cos a hell of a lot of really nice people got killed - just sorting out the shit that happens when people pretend that nazism is an essential part of the spectrum of opinions that needs representation - like life is some sort of college debate.

This is the real world and look what happened the last time those mad dogs got loose. And any bugger who is confident that the correct opinions will win the day is a stupid bugger in my book, and obviously has never read a newspaper.

what's the next thing.... freedom of polio bacteria to flourish and set up their own communities? Freedom of shit to float in the water supply.....

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Peace
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 07:02 PM

Giok's Scottish. They wear Freudian slips under their kilts.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 06:48 PM

Sorry Steve that was a total Freudian slip on my part I did it and I apologise, it was unintentional.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Peace
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 06:34 PM

That was 100 BTW.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Peace
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 06:33 PM

"You know very well that my comment was based on one country and one incident daverailing"

That was posted by my friend, Giok, not by ME. If indeed that's the post to which you refer when you told me: "Peace, i saw you deliberetly called me daverailing, and you clearly were trying to make comparisons with the BNP man on here. Fuck off, if you can't make a point with resorting to personal attacks then you are clearly not as intelligant a person as i previously thought. No doubt it is open season on me for that remark."

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Peace
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 06:28 PM

Steve: that was not my intent at all. In fact, I complimented your choice of title and the placement of it in BS on that BNP thread. If I called you daverailing on that or any other thread, accept my apologies. It was a mistake. Believe that or not, as you choose.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: GUEST,stevenrailing
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 06:19 PM

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: John 'Giok' MacKenzie
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 02:27 PM

You know very well that my comment was based on one country and one incident daverailing, so twisting my words to make it seem like it is equally applicable in all scenarios is not valid.
Why do YOU feel the need to be rude and disrespectfull every day?
Giok

I don't feel the need to be rude, i just know that i often am. Should i be imprisoned? It is a sad day when we accept a law simply because it suits our political beliefs. Irving broke that law in 1988 i believe, which is a LONG time back. As a member of the human race i govern my own morality and not individual nations, not to say i don't respect them, but if i see injustice, i will speak out.

Austria in this instance has a tyrannical law. A law that says to have an opinion on an historical event is illegal. His opinions are evil and repulsive, but equally as evil is the law that prevents him his right to his opinions.

Peace, i saw you deliberetly called me daverailing, and you clearly were trying to make comparisons with the BNP man on here. Fuck off, if you can't make a point with resorting to personal attacks then you are clearly not as intelligant a person as i previously thought. No doubt it is open season on me for that remark.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Emma B
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 04:19 PM

"my understanding was that Irving accepted invitations from right-wing scum to go and address their meetings. No doubt he knew that what he would say would break the law"

I think that is what I said!

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 02:28 PM

It doesn't advance the argument of those who are holding out against free speech that one or two people have drawn a ludicrous equivalence between Austria and islamic states such as Iran and Saudi Arabia. I would hope and expect the UK government to intercede on behalf of any British national who was about to be (say) beheaded for proselytising Christianity in one of those countries. Though in the case of Saudi Arabia I wouldn't hold my breath - I agree completely with Giok on that point.

Emma, my understanding was that Irving accepted invitations from right-wing scum to go and address their meetings. No doubt he knew that what he would say would break the law, but that doesn't mean he went with the sole purpose of breaking the law.

The particular law in question, wherever it came from - and I no longer accept Wolfgang's suggestion that it was imposed by the Allies - stinks. It will be ironic indeed if the Irving case persuades them to reconsider it, but I think that is becoming a real possibility.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 02:27 PM

You know very well that my comment was based on one country and one incident daverailing, so twisting my words to make it seem like it is equally applicable in all scenarios is not valid.
Why do YOU feel the need to be rude and disrespectfull every day?
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Peace
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 02:14 PM

Kid gets caught with a gram of hashish in Canada he/she's looking at a fine and maybe some community for a first offense. Same kid does the same thing in another country and he/she faces ten to twenty years--or maybe the death penalty. Is the law right? If it isn't then whose law is the wrong one? If I were to travel in Turkey I would not care to have a toke or two because the penalties are severe. In Canada, that isn't the case. But then I know Canadian law will not put me in the slam for a decade or more. So, steve, I know where you're coming from, but then Irving knew what he was doing, too.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Emma B
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 01:41 PM

It's NOT about "rude and disrespectful"
It's not even about holding offensive opinions
It's about deliberately entering another country with the sole purpose of breaking their laws!

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: GUEST,stevenrailing
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 01:37 PM

There is no necessity for anyone to sing about the glories of drinking beer among Muslims. I don't think you would find much sympathy for an idiot,who did that,on Mudcat.

And what if some iranians wanted to hear folk music?

Which in a nutshell is what Irving did in Austria, he was rude and disrespectful, and he was being intentionally provocative.

I'm rude and disrespectful everyday. Should i face imprisonment?

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 01:23 PM

Which in a nutshell is what Irving did in Austria, he was rude and disrespectful, and he was being intentionally provocative.
I don't know how old the people are on this thread but I suggest that only the more advanced in years like myself will understand why this law was put in place in Austria. Not being patronising just a thought.
Look how in the UK they still make jokes and films etc about the Nazis, it is a folk memory, and in Austria with their history it must be even worse.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: alanabit
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 12:36 PM

Singing drinking songs in Iran might show a clear commitment to a certain folk culture. It would also be an act of crass insensitivity and rudeness to the local population. No, there should not be a law to outlaw the singing of those songs. If someone is stupid enough to go and provoke the locals anywhere, they must expect to face the consequences.
There is no necessity for anyone to sing about the glories of drinking beer among Muslims. I don't think you would find much sympathy for an idiot,who did that,on Mudcat.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: GUEST,stevenrailing
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 12:09 PM

well it is my sincere opinion peace that it is an unjust law. The issue of whether or not the holocaust happened, which i agree it certainly did, is not at hand here, at hand is whether or not this is a good law?

It is all well and good speaking in formalities like above, 1,2,3 when it suits our political opinions to be outraged by irvings belief, but if say one of our folk musicians on here played a gig in Iran and was imprisoned, would you be so formal and pro-law?

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Peace
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 11:30 AM

1) The Holocaust happened.
2) It is against the law in Austria to say it did NOT happen.
3) He broke the law.
4)

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 11:29 AM

I would suggest that the governments of both the UK and the US are so scared of offending Saudi Arabia that they would extradite you back there to face a charge of dropping litter!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: alanabit
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 11:22 AM

Of course we can criticise a country's laws. Indeed Peter has argued persuasively that Austria's law is unnecessary and counter productive.
There are advantages as well as disadvantages to being governed by the boundaries of a nation. Nobody claims that absolute human justice is available. However, by invoking my British citizenship, I can effectively evade (say)Saudi Arabian judicial penalties if they take exception to my religious views.
Had Mr. Irving exercised his "rights" with a little more prudence, he would not currently be enjoying the hospitality of the Austrian government.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: GUEST,stevenrailing
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 09:48 AM

No, but are you saying as a human we can not critisize individual nations laws?

As a member of the human race, if there is injustice, why should it be governed by boundary of nation.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 07:28 AM

So has it now become, when in Rome, get them to change the rules to suit you?
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 06:34 AM

Guest UK Poll, it is that 15 per cent that's got people like weelittledrummer and gecko so frightened. They lack the courage of their own convictions and fear Irving's views will win the day. Hence rather than argue with him, they have to lock him up. And truth be told, they'd throw away the key, because they can't cope with the thought that he will one day be free to resume his preaching. Against the Lipstadts of this world, they are wee little people indeed.

I'm not sure where Giok was going with his last post, but he did make the intelligent point that in many situations prison is inappropriate and counterproductive. As a former prison governor said on BBC TV (Newsnight) last night, prison should be a recourse only where it is necesary to protect the public. We don't need to be protected from unpalatable thoughts and ideas, however vociferously they may be expressed.

Alanabit raised an interesting point about verbal abuse in relation to free speech. I don't believe free speech should legitimise verbal abuse, but I can see that there's a very uncertain boundary between the two. I suppose I'd be content to let a jury decide when words amount to assault on an individual or individuals.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: GUEST,UK poll: 15% say Holocaust exaggerated
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 05:34 AM

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/4FF6C9D1-33E8-4635-94BC-AFAFD9B29BB3.htm

15% is a lot. and as much as that pains me to see those figures, that tells me that indeed it is 'wrong' to imprison Irving for having an opinion. I fear that here we are, many of us completely agreeing to the imprisonment of a man because we find his opinion repulsive?

Gallileo springs to mind? And before people say, there is no comparison, in retrospect maybe not, but retrospect is an easy thing centuries down the line, and although i don't like irvings opinion, i say shame on us, myself also in the past, who would want a a man behind bars for speaking his MIND, not our mind, his mind.

There was a time when the circles we all love to participate in was the bastion of freedom, i fear that the way we are going, the right in the UK will make ever more strides. I was in my local the other day and i listened to a conversation by some fellow folkies discussing that Nick Griffin was a freedom-fighter! Scoff if you wish, though i hope i hear some reasoned response to this, and not mere bashing, which again, is driving people to the right.

If irvings opinions roughly have 15% vague support, how can we, condemn that whole section of society?

More and more the left is bashing the little guy. I see a thread on here, now closed, about Billy Bragg wanting a CD stopped. I went to se Billy years ago, he was great, i was young and felt he was the defender of traditional freedoms etc, but although i hate the BNP, now he talks about stopping their cd's and beating them up. I am a man of peace, and i fight the right with my words every time the occasion is there.

Of course i fear that my post will only result in me recieving a bashing, which if the case, shows how intolerant this place has now become too.

By the way, i am a member here, but for obvious reasons, i don't want the next folk gathering in my area to be about my 'holocaust denial' as it may be evily intepretated.

Love and respect to you ALL,

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: gecko
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 04:32 AM

Heard on Australian ABC Radio National this morning - "David Irving deserves to languish in the obscurity he so richly deserves"

Beautifully put!

YIU

gecko

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 28 Feb 06 - 09:50 PM

Peter,

The direct quote is from above in this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 28 Feb 06 - 07:32 PM

how dangerous does a thought have to be before you understand that we need protection from it.

this is a man with no love for our ideals of freedom and decency, with no reverence for the blood sacrifice of our parents generation.

in every society there are those who try to legitimise their hatred for their fellow man with some excuse. sometimes it is just hurtful, like thatcher pretending that all those people she took jobs away from, somehow deserved their years of poverty and societal neglect.

the people that irving stands up for, are many leagues beyond that.

don't give them anything. not a kind thought, not a word of compassion and never pretend they have a right to occupy a legitimate status in any human encampment on the face of the planet.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: alanabit
Date: 28 Feb 06 - 03:28 PM

Ah Peter, I do not think Irving should be jailed only for his arrogance and stupidity. (I freely admit that is enough to wipe out any lingering trace of sympathy I had for him though). Irving effectively dared the Austrians to imprison him. I actually agree with most of what you say about freedom of speech. Indeed, the way we react to those, whom we dislike is a good test of our commitment to it.
David Irving is not fighting for freedom of speech. He is fighting for freedom to lie. That is not a freedom I will ever support. He deserves that "freedom" no more than the other racists, who shout lies and try to provoke violence against ethnic groups. He has had his day in court. Overwhelming evidence of lying has been presented against him. We reach the point where the verbal harrasment of a woman, by a stalker, needs to be evaluated for the effect, which it will have on the woman. My view is that David Irving has crossed a similar line. It appears to be the view of the Austrian court too. Irving has essentially told the Austrians that their law stinks. They ignored it once. This was not possible when he returned.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 28 Feb 06 - 08:34 AM

If jailing Irvine might turn him into a martyr, and jailing juvenile offenders turns them into hardened criminals, both of which have been touted as truisms, then why do we bother to jail anybody at all?
We could let the families of murder victims kill whoever they think is the perpetrator, we could give juvenile offenders tickets for holidays in exciting places, we could castrate all sex offenders!
Silly? Yes of course it is, if someone knowingly breaks a law, [and allegedly boasts beforehand that he is going to do it], of course he deserves to go to jail.
Holocaust denial? Funny phrase but in essence a law that in a decent world would have no meaning.
The law on vagrancy in England was I believe brought in after the Napoloenic wars to stop returning soldiers wandering round the country getting into trouble. The law still stands, but what price Napoleon coming back?
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 28 Feb 06 - 08:34 AM

Foulestroupe, it would be a reasonable courtesy to give a source when you quote directly. In any case there is a more coherent account of what he said on BBC radio HERE on the BBC website. (In an interesting illustration of how easy it is to lose sight of objectivity when emotions have been aroused, the BBC originally headed this item: "Irving repeats Holocaust denial." But they quickly reined in and replaced that with the present heading.

All that aside, I'm going to have one more go at this issue, from a slightly different tack.

It is plain that most of those who think Irving got what he deserved share my deep dislike of the man. But that dislike should not be a factor in how he is treated. In fact it is a complete irrelevance. The point at issue is perfectly simple: should anyone be jailed for what he says? Should anyone, indeed, be jailed for "his own arrogance and stupidity," as seems to be good enough reason for alanabit?

For me, Voltaire's famous take on free speech is one of the high watermarks of civilisation, and a guiding principle. But how could I hold to that if at the same time I allowed myself the indulgence of cherrypicking when to apply it and when to ignore it? Free speech is a patent nonsence if it means only the freedom to say what we want to hear.

Deborah Lipstadt - not only a respected historian but also someone who lost family to the Holocaust - has seen beyond one wretched little man to support a greater cause. Set against that level of objectivity, some of the reaction here to Irving's jail sentence looks small-minded indeed. If he serves the three years, I hope that this will produce the sense of satisfaction that some Mudcatters seem to need.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 28 Feb 06 - 07:40 AM

"In a new interview he still says he does not believe that the Natzis carried out a systematic campaign to wipe out European Jews.

His reason apparently is that there were too many survivors! "


They just ran out of time!

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: Roughyed
Date: 28 Feb 06 - 05:57 AM

Irving is always described as a historian but in the potted biographies I have seen (not many admittedly) I haven't seen any academic qualifications.

There seem to be two questions here. Is the Austrian law right and should Irving have been jailed under it. As some have posted above if you go to a country, break the law quite publicly and then return you can expect what you get. I think that Irving uses Holocaust denial as a way of taunting Jews and I think that is unacceptable. Not being an Austrian I can't really appreciate how important or not this law is to them but it must make it more difficult to be a Nazi in Austria and that is no bad thing. I think repeating racist lies reinforces them.

Subject: RE: BS: David Irving goes to prison.
From: freda underhill
Date: 28 Feb 06 - 05:37 AM

agreed. and it's about establishing truth - what is truth? repeat WHAT IS TRUTH? when events have happened, why do people project their twisted perception of reality and try to "redefine" or remake history? what inner need does it serve, to make our own version of the world?

in any situation, people can argue, philosophise, justify or deny - as armchair critics we have the right to speculate, debate and discuss - but courts are about establishing beyond doubt whether events under examination actually happened or not. A scientific process, conducted through the examination of evidence.

there may be debate as to the punishment meted out to irving. but there is no debate as to whether the Holocaust happened.