the sh!t is about to hit the fan

[dan e 1980]

Trial Opens for Accused Holocaust Denier

By WILLIAM J. KOLE, Associated Press Writer Sun Feb 19, 4:28 PM ET

VIENNA, Austria - A right-wing British historian goes on trial Monday on charges of denying the Holocaust occurred — a crime punishable by up to 10 years' imprisonment in this country once run by the Nazis.


The trial of David Irving opens amid fresh — and fierce — debate over freedom of expression in Europe, where the printing and reprinting of unflattering cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad has triggered violent protests worldwide.

Irving, 67, has been in custody since his arrest in November on charges stemming from two speeches he gave in Austria in 1989 in which he was accused of denying the Nazis' extermination of 6 million Jews. An eight-member jury and a panel of three judges will hear the proceedings, which officials said could produce a verdict as early as Monday.

Within two weeks of his arrest, Irving asserted through his lawyer that he now acknowledges the existence of Nazi-era gas chambers.

The historian had tried to win release on bail, but a Vienna court refused, saying it considered him a flight risk.

His lawyer, Elmar Kresbach, said last month the Third Reich historian was getting up to 300 pieces of fan mail a week from supporters around the world, and that while in detention he was writing his memoirs under the working title, "Irving's War."

Irving was arrested Nov. 11 in the southern Austrian province of Styria on a warrant issued in 1989 and charged under a federal law that makes it a crime to publicly diminish, deny or justify the Holocaust.

In the past, however, he has claimed that Adolf Hitler knew little if anything about the Holocaust, and has been quoted as saying there was "not one shred of evidence" the Nazis carried out their "Final Solution" to exterminate the Jewish population on such a massive scale.

"What was he doing in Austria? God only knows. Possibly looking for an audience," Austrian state television said in a pre-trial commentary.

Vienna's national court, where the trial is being held, ordered the balcony gallery closed to prevent projectiles from being thrown down at the bench, the newspaper Die Presse reported Sunday.

It quoted officials as saying they were bracing for Irving's supporters to give him the Nazi salute or shout out pro-Hitler slogans during the trial, which will continue into Tuesday if a verdict is not forthcoming on Monday.

Irving is the author of nearly 30 books, including "Hitler's War," which challenges the extent of the Holocaust, and has contended most of those who died at concentration camps such as Auschwitz succumbed to diseases such as typhus rather than execution.

In 2000, Irving sued the American Holocaust scholar Deborah Lipstadt for libel in a British court, but lost. The presiding judge in that case wrote that Irving was "an active Holocaust denier ... anti-Semitic and racist."

Irving has had numerous run-ins with the law over the years.

In 1992, a judge in Germany fined him the equivalent of $6,000 for publicly insisting the Nazi gas chambers at Auschwitz were a hoax.
_________________________________________________

if this guy is found guilty and charged, there's gonna be some angry muslims claiming that jewish intrests get better treatment than islamic intrests in relation to the prophet cartoon. this is very bad timing in an already inflamed europe. this is one unfolding story to keep an eye on.

 

[bizorky]

if this guy is found guilty and charged, there's gonna be some angry muslims claiming that jewish intrests get better treatment than islamic intrests in relation to the prophet cartoon. this is very bad timing in an already inflamed europe. this is one unfolding story to keep an eye on

The fact that irving claims to an historian, yet neglects the evidence of the Holocaust makes him laughable. Holocaust deniers are not interested in facts, they are interested in promoting their own opinions.

As for your concerns over "bad timing," what should the courts do? Drop the charges?

 

[dan e 1980]

The fact that irving claims to an historian, yet neglects the evidence of the Holocaust makes him laughable. Holocaust deniers are not interested in facts, they are interested in promoting their own opinions.

they just do it to piss people off.

As for your concerns over "bad timing," what should the courts do? Drop the charges?

:rolleyes

i'm just pointing out 2 events taking place at the worst possible time. this is gonna cause more protest & possibly more violence.

 

[EnviroTO]

I don't really understand why he is on trial... shouldn't he be just sent for a mental evaluation and robbed of any authority to teach history? Did he go beyond that and try to recruit people and entice people to commit crimes? There are a whole bunch of conspiracy theorists out there stating 9/11 was planned by the US, saying the buildings were rigged, saying the aircraft that crashed into the White House wasn't an airliner, etc... why no sentencing for that nonsense? The holocaust was a bad event in history, but not the only bad event in history, not the first, and not the last. Why is there specific rules dealing with holocaust history but not on other events. If someone denies that the Vietnam war never happed is it a crime or just complete nonsense? A person who denies the Vietnam war happened shouldn't be allowed to teach history but does a criminal sentence make sense if he doesn't go beyong making false statements about history? Should there be a historical truth preservation law and who decides the historical truth that should be preserved? Lying or baseless opinions aren't a crime or are they... usually the crime doesn't occur until you target a comment at an individual and say something slanderous. Make no mistake I think this guy is wrong for making false statements but I'm just wondering whether it makes sense to have laws specific to a particular event in history or to protect a specific culture's interests but not other events in history or other culture's interests in the same law, and wondering where the line is between talking nonsense, lying, and breaking the law is and should be?

 

[bizorky]

I don't really understand why he is on trial...

Certain European countries have expressly stated laws against Holocaust denial. Sadly, a product of the local history.

While I see what you are trying to say, and have an issue with tossing people in prison for what amounts to self-imposed ignorance and its prmotion, the Holocaust is different from conspiracy theories and their promoters. No one (so far as I know) denies that 9/11 ever happened, unless they suspect that everyone is delusional and that some buildings where never there in the first place.
Holocaust denial is typically about denying that millions of people were murdered in an organized and systematic fashion on the basis of their religion. The purpose of the deniers is to bring into question the group of people who suffered directly as of this event.

Sadly, too many genocidal acts have become forgotten because there is no concerted effort to remember or educate. The fact that Jewish organizations have worked hard to bring rememberance to the Holocaust has often brought accusations of believing themselves to be unique or special. The sad fact is that for the most part, we, as a society, are quite forgetful historically, and that acts of genocide and mass murder are far too common than we want them to be.

 

[boiler2000]

The sad fact is that for the most part, we, as a society, are quite forgetful historically, and that acts of genocide and mass murder are far too common than we want them to be.

Remembrance is problematic especially when it concerns genocide, because of the fact that the vast majority of those involved in the event are, by definition, either dead or hiding from justice.

In the Holocaust, the system of extermination used future victims (Sonderkommando) as a big part of the process, leaving only a tiny number of witnesses alive after the fact.

Remembering genocide is a special problem that needs special attention in society - a concerted effort to learn and teach about it.

 

[dan e 1980]

he was convicted and set to 3 years.

if teaching/spreading a unproven theory or biased/fake story is a crime, i wonder how many doors this opens up. one can argue that every religion is breaking the law since you can't prove things like creationism, etc.

you gotta be careful when making laws. it can open a whole can of worms.

 

[fiendishlibrarian]

The funny thing with Irving is that a couple of his books dealing with the forced displacement of the German population after the war, in places like Czechoslovakia, were well-regarded. He was considered somewhat legit once upon a time.

 

[dan e 1980]

Denied Holocaust, British historian jailed 3 years
Feb. 20, 2006. 05:17 PM
VERONIKA OLEKSYN
ASSOCIATED PRESS

VIENNA — Right-wing British historian David Irving was sentenced to three years in prison today after admitting to an Austrian court that he denied the Holocaust, a crime in the country where Hitler was born.

Irving, who pleaded guilty and then insisted during his one-day trial that he now acknowledged the Nazis’ Second World War slaughter of six million Jews, had faced up to 10 years behind bars. Before the verdict, Irving conceded that he had erred in contending there were no gas chambers at the Auschwitz concentration camp.

“I made a mistake when I said there were no gas chambers at Auschwitz,†Irving testified, at one point expressing sorrow “for all the innocent people who died during the Second World War.â€

Irving, stressing he only relied on primary sources, said he came across new information in the early 1990s from top Nazi officials, including personal documents belonging to Adolf Eichmann, that led him to rethink certain previous assertions.

But despite his apparent epiphany, Irving, 67, maintained he had never questioned the Holocaust.

“I’ve never been a Holocaust denier and I get very angry when I’m called a Holocaust denier,†he said.

Irving’s lawyer said he would appeal the sentence.

“I consider the verdict a little too stringent. I would say it’s a bit of a message trial,†Elmar Kresbach said.

State prosecutor Michael Klackl declined to comment on the verdict. In his closing arguments, however, he criticized Irving for ``putting on a show†and for not admitting that the Nazis killed Jews in an organized and systematic manner.

Irving appeared shocked as the sentence was read out. Moments later, an elderly man identifying himself as a family friend called out, “Stay strong, David! Stay strong!†before he was escorted from the courtroom.

Irving has been in custody since his November arrest on charges stemming from two speeches he gave in Austria in 1989 in which he was accused of denying the Nazis’ extermination of six million Jews.

Irving, handcuffed and wearing a navy blue suit, arrived at the court carrying one of his most controversial books, Hitler’s War, which challenges the extent of the Holocaust.

Throughout the day, Irving sat quietly and attentively in the stifling courtroom.

Irving’s trial was held amid new and fierce debate over freedom of expression in Europe, where the printing and reprinting of unflattering cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad has triggered violent protests worldwide.

“Of course it’s a question of freedom of speech,†Irving said. ``The law is an ass.â€

The court convicted Irving after his guilty plea under the 1992 law, which applies to “whoever denies, grossly plays down, approves or tries to excuse the National Socialist genocide or other National Socialist crimes against humanity in a print publication, in broadcast or other media.â€

Austria was Hitler’s birthplace and once was run by the Nazis.

“He is everything but a historian . . . He is a dangerous falsifier of history,†Klackl said, calling Irving’s statements an ``abuse of freedom of speech.â€

Klackl said the Austrian law does not “hinder historical works.â€

“You have to look at each case individually,†he said. “The point is, what is someone trying to do? It’s the intent.â€

Kresbach, however, said people “should have a right to be wrong.â€

The verdict was welcomed by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, which also highlighted the issue of freedom of speech.

“While Irving’s rants would not have led to legal action in the United States, it is important that we recognize and respect Austria’s commitment to fighting Holocaust denial, the most odious form of hatred, as part of its historic responsibility to its Nazi past,†the centre’s associate dean, Rabbi Abraham Cooper, said in a statement.

Kresbach said last month the controversial Third Reich historian was getting up to 300 pieces of fan mail a week from supporters around the world and was writing his memoirs in detention under the working title Irving’s War.

Irving was arrested Nov. 11 in the southern Austrian province of Styria on a warrant issued in 1989. He tried to win his provisional release on $24,000 US bail, but a Vienna court rejected the motion, saying it considered him a flight risk.

Within two weeks of his arrest, he asserted through his lawyer that he had come to acknowledge the existence of Nazi-era gas chambers.

However, he has claimed previously that Adolf Hitler knew little if anything about the Holocaust, and he has been quoted as saying there was “not one shred of evidence†the Nazis carried out their ``Final Solution†to exterminate the Jewish population on such a massive scale.

Irving, the author of nearly 30 books, has contended most of those who died at concentration camps such as Auschwitz succumbed to diseases such as typhus rather than execution.

In 2000, Irving sued American Holocaust scholar Deborah Lipstadt for libel in a British court, but lost. The presiding judge in that case, Charles Gray, wrote that Irving was “an active Holocaust denier . . . anti-Semitic and racist.â€

Irving has had numerous run-ins with the law over the years.

In 1992, a judge in Germany fined him the equivalent of $6,000 for publicly insisting the Nazi gas chambers at Auschwitz were a hoax.

__________________________________________________

it's obvious that irving believes in the so called "worldwide jewish conspiracy". doesn't him going to jail just further his his and others beliefs and fuel more neonaziism?

would it not be better to challenge his claims publicly and prove him wrong/make him look like a fool rather than a mayrter?

i know this is a touchy subject but IMO when you jail one denier, you probably end up creating another thousand in his place. it seems rather counterproductive to the cause of trying to stop hate.

 

[shawnmicallef]

^^ "considered legit at one time"

Well, Ernst Zundel addressed the 1968 Liberal party convention (he was running for the leadership -- but that other guy won).

 

[blixa442]

Are you serious? That's hilarious.

 

[dan e 1980]

Zündel emigrated to Canada from West Germany in 1958, when he was 19, in order to avoid being conscripted by the German military. He married a French-Canadian, Janick Larouche, in 1960 with whom he had two sons, Pierre and Hans. During the 1960s he came under the tutelage of Canadian fascist Adrien Arcand.

In the mid 1960s while living in Montreal he was an organizer among immigrants for the Ralliement des créditistes. In 1968 he joined the Liberal Party of Canada and ran in that year's leadership convention using it as a platform to allege that Canadian society was replete with anti-German attitudes. He dropped out of the contest prior to voting, but not before delivering his campaign speech to the convention.

Professionally, Zündel worked as a graphic artist and printer, on several occasions he was commissioned to illustrate covers for Maclean's Magazine. His views on Nazism and Jews were not well known in the 1960s and 1970s and he initially published his opinions under the pseudonym Christof Friedrich.


why would someone with far right ideologies want to run a center-left leaning party?

 

[dan e 1980]

shawn, what was considered legit?

 

[unimaginative2]

He obviously didn't want to run it: he dropped out before the voting. He just wanted to make a speech where lots of people would be watching.