Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Tooj

Holocaust Denier Pleads Guilty

Recommended Posts

BRITISH historian David Irving today pleaded guilty to a charge of denying the Holocaust happened.

 

He went on trial in Vienna for speeches he made 17 years ago.

 

Irving was arrested in Austria on November 11 when he arrived to give a lecture to students.

 

Austrian law makes denying the existence of the Holocaust illegal - there has been a warrant for his arrest outstanding in the country since 1989.

 

The charges stemmed from speeches Irving delivered that year in Vienna and in the southern town of Leoben.

 

In the past he has faced allegations of spreading anti-Semitic and racist

ideas. He is the author of nearly 30 books, including Hitler’s War, which challenges the extent of the Holocaust.

 

He once insisted that Adolf Hitler knew nothing about the systematic

slaughter of six million Jews, and he has been quoted as saying there was "not one shred of evidence" that the Nazis carried out their Final Solution on such a massive scale.

 

The historian has also said he does not deny Jews were killed by the Nazis, but challenges the number and manner of Jewish concentration camp deaths.

 

He has questioned whether large-scale gas chambers were used to exterminate Jews, and claimed that the number of those who perished was far lower than those generally accepted.

 

Irving wrote in a letter from his prison cell that some of his views on gas chambers had changed.

 

In 1992, a judge in Germany fined Irving the equivalent of £4,000 for publicly insisting the Nazi gas chambers at Auschwitz were a hoax.

 

Mr Irving's lawyer Elmar Kresbach, speaking from Vienna earlier, confirmed that his client would plead guilty.

 

He argued that there were many reasons to give Mr Irving "a certain leniency in sentencing".

 

He said: "His lecture happened 17 years ago. He is an English citizen, he doesn’t live in Austria, (he is) 68-years-old. He is a historian who is well known. He is not really dangerous, especially in Austria."

 

Asked if Irving had revised his opinion on the Holocaust and the existence of the gas chambers, Mr Kresbach replied: "Yes. That is correct.

 

"He seems to have revised his former opinions and he told me why: because he found new evidence, new documents, confirming the Holocaust and the mass murder of Jews and other people during the Second World War."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will always have a place in MY heart for sinking Murdoch over the Hitler Diaries.................................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see why or how an opinion can be considered illegal ?

 

What happened to freedom of speach ? ok, clearly the bloke is some kind of mentalist, but surely his opinion is his own, and has the right to voice it no matter how fucked up ?

 

3 years for fuck sake ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
holocaust denial is illegal in austria. He went public with his denial. what did he expect?

98162[/snapback]

 

 

He's clearly a pillock of the highest order, but to lock someone up just because he has some deranged opinion is shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand the context of Austria and Germany having those laws but at the same time I fundamentally oppose any laws against opinion/belief/thought. I can see people using stuff like this to justify blasphemy laws which are abhorrent.

 

I also think the judge should have taken into account the recent furore and erred on the side of the right to free speech.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

whilst I understand the sensitivity of Germany and Austria surrounding the Nazis and the Holocaust, I think the punishment is wrong.

 

I don't agree with his views, butall he was doing was expressing his views as a historian. He argued that case and employed historical methods to it.

 

Whilst I don't agree with what he said, but as a historian myself, it's what History is all about. Opinions. People have their own opinions and use historical methods and evidence to support their views. Historians of course disagree and debate with each other over it all. It's what the subject is all about, regardless of whether you actually agree with someone's viewpoint or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In AUSTRIA

B);):blush::blush::blush:

 

 

A country that elected a President in the 1980's who was in the NSDAP & the Waffen SS?

 

Most people reckon Jormany has made a very serious effort to confront its past but they don't give the Austrians many marks at all

 

:):):):):crylaughin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't see why or how an opinion can be considered illegal ?

 

What happened to freedom of speach ? ok, clearly the bloke is some kind of mentalist, but surely his opinion is his own, and has the right to voice it no matter how fucked up ?

 

3 years for fuck sake ?

98160[/snapback]

 

 

I'd love to know how many Austrians are doing 3 years for the same offence...............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

Recent tweets

Toontastic Facebook

Donate to Toontastic

Keeping the lights on since... well ages ago
TT-Staff


×