Irving pleads guilty and backtracks on Holocaust denial

The Times (UK) ^ | February 20, 2006 | By Philippe Naughton and agencies in Vienna

[aculeus]

However ...

The only way for Mr Irving to secure a light sentence would be for him to convince the eight-strong jury that he had indeed changed his spots and was no longer an active Holocaust denier. If he does manage to escape with a suspended sentence, he would then be free to travel to a "scientific" congress on the Holocaust in Iran to which he has been invited.

[vimto]

We all know this chaps views.

As unpleasant as they are they should not be criminalized.

Australia and some other countries (like UK) are going down the wrong road on this one....

[satchmodog9]

High libel court. WOW.

[BenLurkin]

This (IMO) scumbag can go to Iran -- but he will never be able to retract his words admitting the truth about Auschwitz.

[ohioWfan]

If denying reality were a crime in the U.S., then every Dem in the Senate would be in jail.

[vimto]

"If denying reality were a crime in the U.S., then every Dem in the Senate would be in jail."

That cracked me up.

kind regards

[Praxeus]

The greater issue here is that someone can be tried and jailed for an opinion in a so-called democracy. It is disgusting, chilling, and facist.

Hitler would be proud.

I fear there are some here on FR who would like to see this kind of crap happen in the US. Hopefully the guns will stop that from ever becoming a reality.

[Peter Libra]

Right on.

England produced Winston Churchill- and David Irving. Now as to that high seat of sanctimony, Austria, they produced Mozart. Oh, I hear the faint sounds of the Horst Wessel lied. Who can that famous Austrian be?

Why- it is Adolf Hitler

[A. Pole]

The only way for Mr Irving to secure a light sentence would be for him to convince the eight-strong jury that he had indeed changed his spots and was no longer an active Holocaust denier.

Bump

[A. Pole]

England produced Winston Churchill

Churchill has made some nasty statements too. And he supported the use of poison gas against Iraqi insurgents.

[Peter Libra]

One always learns something on FR. I am always willing to learn. The articles posted by you, will be carefully perused. Yes, we of the snot-nosed English working class, knew of the dark side of Churchill. He was in favour of the use of armed troops against striking workers. A fact hotly disputed though.

The American victor of the Civil War, said "War is hell". He was right. Most people,even Americans do not know that atrocities against civilians marked Lincoln's triumph.

What I do think should be said,- is that the bottom line is- How many Jews did this person persecute and murder?. When one considers the Imams and the cries for the extermination of Jews and indeed, the obliteration of Israel- how does Irving's denials stand?.

There is bigger fish to fry than Irving, says I. ---

[Praxeus]

"Churchill has made some nasty statements.."

So did Abe Lincoln.

"And he supported the use of poison gas against Iraqi insurgents"

Hmmm.. what was it that Delano and Harry supported? All's fair in love and war, right?

Really though.. surely we are not questioning that Churchill was a great man, are we?

[Praxeus]

"There is bigger fish to fry than Irving.."

The issue is, he should not be fried. Period. Not for speech.

Ridicule him. Ignore him. Boycott him. Whatever. But Jail him? No way.

[Petronski]

Precisely!

I'd love to believe he's had a change of heart, but this guy is a skunk, and I bet he's willing to say anything to get probation or a suspended sentence so he can flee the jurisdiction and cry "Neener neener neener!"

[Tarkin]

The most idiotic part in this whole thing is that denying Holocaust may result in a 10-year sentence in Austria. Most rapists (and actually even many murderers) get less than that.

[rcocean]

That someone should be put in jail for holding a goofy view of history is insane.

I loved this part:

"Mr Irving faces a maximum sentence of ten years in jail under Austria's 1946 Banning Law which makes it an offense to publicly diminish, deny or justify the Holocaust. He has been held without bail since November on charges stemming from two speeches he made to Austrian rightwingers in 1989."

So, in other words, he might spend 10 years in prison for something he said 17 years ago! Which he now says is "incorrect".

Thank God for the first amendment. The Euros haven't changed their spots, they're still Totalitarians at heart.

I can understand why Hitler came from Austria. What a country.

[Tarkin]

Exactly. Especially not for 10 years...

[rcocean]

No doubt you want him killed.

[vimto]

Yes - from what I've heard this law was introduced after WWII when the issue was very sensitive but has been left on the stature book Many Austrians are questioning this it seems.

Apparently he had been in Austria several times since the warrant was issued in 1989. Sounds politically motivated to me. See what the judge says ...

[Petronski]

Your words, not mine.