Welcome to the philosophical and spiritual musings of...
Blogging Dating Politics Relationships Personal Development Spirituality
 

Saturday, February 25, 2006

More Holocaust denial

This week David Irving was imprisoned in Austria for 3 years for 'holocaust denial'.

If I stated that men never walked on the moon, would they lock me up for 'moon walking denial'?

If I stated that the earth was in fact flat, would they lock me up for 'globe denial'?

If I stated that inside every kiwi was an aussie trying to get out, would they lock me up for 'kiwi denial'?

If I stated that World War II never happened, would they lock me up for 'WWII denial'?

Then why the frack would they lock me up if I stated that the Holocaust never happened, unless it actually didn't and they don't want the truth to be known?

If you are arguing against truths that are real and factual, then there is no need to lock you up for being an idiot. If, however, you are arguing against a truth that is actually a cover-up, where authorities want you to believe that a lie is in fact a truth, then it is in the authorities' interests to lock you away and prevent you from telling people the truth.

There is no reason that 'holocaust denial' be a crime resulting in imprisonment unless the holocaust story is a lie that they don't want you to know about.


UPDATE: I just had an extra thought. If you can be locked up for simply expressing an opinion, then what's to stop this from setting a precedent and they start locking people up for expressing other opinions?

Americans are already discovering it's a crime to be unpatriotic. The Bush government is working at prosecuting people for sedition, which means: An illegal action inciting resistance to lawful authority and tending to cause the disruption or overthrow of the government. Any comment or action that is designed to disrupt or overthrow the government is a crime under this law. This means all Democrats are guilty of sedition. All anti-Bush blogs and commentators are guilty of sedition.

Freedom of speech is slowly but surely being outlawed, and the world sits back and lets it happen.

Posted on 2/25/2006 02:27:00 PM Backlinks


If you have found value in what Alan (the author) has given you, please leave a donation for him so you can enjoy the spirit of giving too.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

3 Comments:

Anonymous lee pletzers said...

>>>> If I stated that inside every kiwi was an aussie trying to get out, would they lock me up for 'kiwi denial'?

Yep, and we'd throw away the key.

I don't know much of this story. How old is he? What evidence does he have? They wouldn't lock him up for just his opinion.

2/26/2006 04:13:00 PM  
Blogger Chancelucky said...

Alan, I'd agree in general about one's right to say most anything without fear of criminal sanction.
Irving's story is a bit more interesting than that. He held himself out as a historian and was telling the world that his position had "basis" in fact when he was blatantly ignoring documents, oral histories, and live witnesses who could prove otherwise.
If you look into the case of Irving's libel suit against a Jewish historian who fully debunked him. Irving's opponent won btw in a British Court, you'll see that Irving hardly backs the notion that you can say what you want without legal sanction.
It is interesting that Irving in the Austrian case admitted that he had been proven wrong after he had written the book.

I have no idea what Irving's motive was for essentially falsifying history (I know history's a subjective thing) I also know that's not necessarily different from the general principle, but one can state one's belief without fear of legal sanction.
Even in "free speech/press" socieites, one can not knowingly say things that are demonstrably false about other people without they're being able to sue for libel, damage to reputation, etc.
Part of the basis of the Austrian law is that the people who would be most offended by Irving's lies (most likely what they were) were killed in those gas chambers and thus can't seek damages on their own.

2/28/2006 08:53:00 AM  
Blogger Alan Howard said...

Chancelucky wrote: "It is interesting that Irving in the Austrian case admitted that he had been proven wrong after he had written the book."

Just as I thought, Irving admitted in prison that he had 'changed his mind' only to avoid a jail sentence: link.

3/01/2006 08:42:00 AM  

Post a Comment


(C) Alan Howard 1998 - 2006