Useful web sites

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    « Denying anti-semitic motives to avoid riots? | Main | Revelation! French admit anti-semitism could be a motive »

    Comments

    Martin Morgan

    The notorious reference to Irving as an academic has been edited out of Clare Murphy's updated piece, so paragraph 3 now reads:

    "The Briton has now been sentenced to three years after being found guilty of Holocaust denial at a trial in Vienna."

    Judy

    It could just be because my post about that Clare Murphy piece got picked up and featured by Biased BBC and quite a few high profile sites....

    Or it could just be entirely coincidental...

    Fabián

    I am 100% with you, Judy. He markets lies, he profits from them. He should be punished because of them. End of story.

    And if he ever recants his recanting, may God that he does so while still in Austria, so he can get other 3 or more years in jail.

    markus

    I don't have a clue about who you are or where you live. Someone linked to your blog in one of the comments at Roger Simon's blog.

    I live in America, where we believe in an absolute right to unfettered political speech. People who support state efforts to suppress speech you find offensive disgust me. In fact, you are as disgusting as the Holocaust deniers themselves.

    Since when is it a crime to have "repeatedly falsified and distorted historical evidence"? If Irving's work is as specious and easily refuted as you claim it is, then why are you so afraid of it? Why don't you simply refute it in the public square? Should be quite easy.

    The timing of this decision could not be worse for those of us who care about preserving the hard won right to blasphemy and other heterodox behavior. It shows the Muslim extremists that European claims to defend free speech in the context of the Danish cartoons are so much hot air. Evidently, certain groups are exempt from defamation, other groups are not. When confronted with this hypocrisy, the reaction will be predictable: to extend censorship to anti-Muslim speech.

    chevalier de st george

    markus
    The operative word is Maliciously perverted and distorted history to cause anguish and suffering.
    Imagine if a phony American historian wrote that the Japanese never bombed Pearl Harbor but the American Gov invented the story because the cowardly US forces had gone A wall.
    You mught not give a damn if you have not served your country, but the thousands of relatives of those dead soldiers in those underseas graves, would be seriously upset at such MALICIOUS lies or deliberate flasification of historical evidence.

    Martin Hague

    Given the BBCs coverage of any stories involving Israel, it's hardly surprising that they don't acknowledge the anti-Semitism of Irving.

    I'm still reeling from their use of 'pbuh' after every mention of Mohammed on their website.

    The world is literally going mad.

    Martin Hague

    Markus is of course correct - unfettered free speech is an absolute requirement. Irving is an anti-semite, and the BBC should simply be more forthright about the fact. I too live in the United States, and have been deeply troubled by the media's self-censorship over the Danish cartoons.

    They showed no such restraint (nor should they) when printing pictures of Jesus Christ in a jar of urine.

    Perhaps the threat of having their head lopped off is influencing the news judgement of Newspaper Editors.

    simon

    Irving is imprisoned for his views. That fact is digusting. You are free to blog, but for how much longer if the Austrian attitude to free speech becomes more fashionable? In Britain there are signs that this is happening.

    You should be ashamed at quoting the Austrian prosecutors opinion that Irving is not a serious historian as if that justifies imprisoning a man for his beliefs. Austrian prosecutors earn money from a judicial system that denies free speech, and because of that they are corrupt. I suppose we should be grateful that Austria has improved over the years. Not so long ago the Austrians would have sent Irving to the local concentration camp or the nearest Gestapo office for expressing views the state found unacceptable. He would very probably have been killed for his beliefs. Now they only imprison him for three years. This is a great improvemnet and we can only hope that this improvement continues and the Austrian state learns how to cope with free speech.

    Kathy

    A man imprisoned for his beliefs whether they be right or wrong? Disgusting. And the Brits think that we Americans are brutal?

    Judy

    Irving wasn't imprisoned for his beliefs, but for his activities in creating and disseminating fraud. His frauds include the invention, falsification and manipulation of historical evidence, in the service of the active promotion of anti-semitism and the exoneration of Hitler and the Nazi murder machine from responsibility for the mass murders they organized and perpetrated.

    The comments to this entry are closed.

    August 2015

    Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
                1
    2 3 4 5 6 7 8
    9 10 11 12 13 14 15
    16 17 18 19 20 21 22
    23 24 25 26 27 28 29
    30 31          
    Blog powered by Typepad