Irving pleads guilty and backtracks on Holocaust denial

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

[aculeus]

David Irving, the revisionist historian, pleaded guilty today to criminal charges of denying the Holocaust and conceded that he had been mistaken when he claimed that there were no gas chambers at Auschwitz.

But, in comments to reporters and in testimony before a Viennese court, the British writer denied that he had ever written a book specifically about the Holocaust and said that after revision of his own views he now accepted that million of Jews were indeed murdered in Nazi death camps.

"I am not a Holocaust denier. My views have changed," he said. "History is a constantly growing tree: the more you learn, the more documents are available, the more you learn, and I have learned a lot since 1989.

"Yes, there were gas chambers," Mr Irving added. "Millions of Jews died, there is no question. I don’t know the figures. I’m not an expert on the Holocaust."

[Tarkin]

The only problem is that AFAIK Irving never denied that Holocaust happened. I actually bothered to read a couple of his books ("Nuernberg" is actually very well written, even though he obviously sympathizes with the Germans). He only claimed that:
a) gas chambers weren't used to kill Jews
b) Hitler didn't know about Holocaust.
Obviously these claims are idiotic beyond belief (especially the second one) but that doesn't change the fact that he's not a Holocaust "denier" (because he never denied that it actually happened, at least not in his books). Anyway, even if he claimed that Holocaust never happened I don't think he should be jailed. Imprisoning people for telling lies isn't a good idea (BTW, when are the European courts going to start prosecuting French communists for denying communist atrocities?)

[veronica]

There is a reason Holocaust denial is, and should be illegal, especially in countries where the Jews were slaughtered. Holocaust denial rehabilitates the Nazis, and makes worthless the deaths of the Six Million and others who died in WWII. Holocaust denial is more than a mere dispute about history.

[veronica]

Holocaust denial takes many forms. Disputing the existence of the gas chambers is as odious as claiming there was no Holocaust.

[Grut]

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

Not so; in the Senate, there is no reality.

[Tarkin]

What about GULag denial? What about What about Ukrainian Genocide/Grand Famine (10-15 Milion people dead in just two years) denial? What about Armenian Genocide denial? What about many other atrocities that can be denied without any fear? Should we criminalize them as well?

[veronica]

Who is denying those events? Is there a cottage industry based upon those denials?

[Tarkin]

Is it? If I hypothetically claimed that 6 Milion Jews were shot and not killed in gas chambers would that make me a Holocaust denier????

[Peter Libra]

Sigmund Freud, was a worlds foremost psychologist. He was granted refugee status in England. He fled Austria- for good reason. A question that could have been posed to this renowned man is this.

It is a given that Germany and Austria were responsible for the persecution and murder of Jews. Why then, are the two countries where this happened, do they have the most severe laws against denial?

Why then do they charge persons whose countries fought against the persecutors?

Just a little query to all and sundry.

[Grut]

Oh yeah -- it's worth mentioning that all the posters who keep saying "six million" are 'denying' the five million or so non-Jews the Nazis also murdered.

[veronica]

Yes, it would.

Deceit & Misrepresentation The Techniques of Holocaust Denial - Nizkor.org

Why deny what is proven fact? Why would someone do that?

[dennisw]

hmmmm.......

[sheltonmac]

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.

Exactly. Using Nazi-like tactics against a holocaust-denier? I'm amazed that the irony of this situation is lost on so many people.

[SJackson]

It is a given that Germany and Austria were responsible for the persecution and murder of Jews. Why then, are the two countries where this happened, do they have the most severe laws against denial?...Why then do they charge persons whose countries fought against the persecutors?...Just a little query to all and sundry.

Because in general these laws weren't designed to address holocaust denial, rather a resurgence of the Nazi Party. At the time a valid concern in countries like Austria and Germany. Note the law Irving is accused of violating dates to 1946. The only deniers at that time were died in the wool Nazis, who for some reason Austria felt they needed to keep out of power. Hopefully Austria will give Irving a kick in the *ss out of the country, he can but his own plane ticket, then he can get on with his smoke and mirrors routine.

[sheltonmac]

There is a reason Holocaust denial is, and should be illegal ...

You want to outlaw speech with which you disagree? So did the Nazis.

[Tarkin]

Who is denying those events?

Let's see - about GULag, and other Commie crimes. Do you remember what happened when "Black Book of Communism" was published? The heads of social-democrats in western Europe literally exploded. The denial of communist atrocities is common and an indefinetly greater problem than denial of nazi crimes. When Latvian foreign minister (3-4 years ago) condemned communism and said that "Soviet terror were as bad as Nazi terror" (which is BTW not true because Soviet crimes during Stalin's era were much worse than Nazi crimes) she was accused of being an "anti-Semite", a "fascist" and many European politicians demanded her resignation.

Holodomor (Grand Famine)? Well, many Russian authors continue claiming that the Holodomor was not an act of genocide but a "mere famine". Also f.ex. a Canadian journalist Douglas Tottle, wrote "Fraud, Famine and Fascism: The Ukrainian Genocide Myth from Hitler to Harvard"

As to the Armenian genocide it is repeatedly denied by the Turkish government.

[John Lenin]

Thought crime! Don't think and they can't arrest you ...

[veronica]

The Nazis did not want "outlaw speech." They wanted to exterminate the European Jews. And they used speech to demonize Jews, thereby creating the atmosphere in which the Holocaust could take place. In publications like Der Stuermer, Jews were propagandized against, to the point where many Germans came to see the Jews as "vermin," a favorite Nazi term for Jews.

The Germans now understand all too well that words can lead to deeds. If you take the time to research it, you will find that most Holocaust deniers are Neo-Nazis, or at least have an affinity for National Socialism. They are not interested in history, but in rehabilitating National Socialism. Or they are just rabid Jewhaters, like Mel Gibson's crackpot father.

[veronica]

You are making specious arguments. You are giving isolated examples of denials of other atrocities, as a way of excusing Holocaust denial.

[sheltonmac]

The Nazis did not want "outlaw speech."

So, people were allowed to say what they wanted about Hitler and the Nazi regime? Dissenters weren't arrested?

Do you really see no irony in using Nazi-like tactics against a holocaust-denier? Tell me: what speech would you like to see outlawed here in the U.S.?

[Sometimes A River]

Those events are certainly downplayed.

And many of those events were far graver than the one Iriving denied.