Harvester Of Souls 40 Posted February 20, 2006 Will he last 3 years in prison? I'm tempted with a sneaky fiver... Nazi Sympathiser Does Porridge... 3 years for free speech... anyone still believe it exists? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deadsox 894 Posted February 20, 2006 Will he last 3 years in prison? I'm tempted with a sneaky fiver... Nazi Sympathiser Does Porridge... 3 years for free speech... anyone still believe it exists? It still exists Harv, but we have to be on guard. Beware those who want to punish unpopular opinions (although I believe the holocaust deniers are idiots). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Phantom 2,533 Posted February 20, 2006 Will he last 3 years in prison? I'm tempted with a sneaky fiver... Nazi Sympathiser Does Porridge... 3 years for free speech... anyone still believe it exists? It still exists Harv, but we have to be on guard. Beware those who want to punish unpopular opinions (although I believe the holocaust deniers are idiots). Believe it or not, he calls himself a historian Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deadsox 894 Posted February 20, 2006 Will he last 3 years in prison? I'm tempted with a sneaky fiver... Nazi Sympathiser Does Porridge... 3 years for free speech... anyone still believe it exists? It still exists Harv, but we have to be on guard. Beware those who want to punish unpopular opinions (although I believe the holocaust deniers are idiots). Believe it or not, he calls himself a historian You can put your shoes in the oven, but that don't make 'em biscuits. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
M Busby Airlines 7 Posted February 21, 2006 The holocaust was consensual. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
millwall32 114 Posted February 21, 2006 Don't see how he could be considered to be worse than Garry Glitter. Irving writes highly innacurate history that is picked up on and used as justification by self-hating idiots who consensually believe in what jhe says. Glitter seems to pick on vulnerable young individuals and abuse them against there will in a way, and indeed in a location (the far east as oposed to anything to do with the antatomy) , that they cannot do anything about, which is tangible, and which has long-reaching psychological effects. Both bad people but one surely worse than the other.# Also one more likely to be ounished than the other. I think the punishment should be the other way around. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
football_fan 42 Posted February 21, 2006 Is he in ill health or close to dying? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gunjaman5000 30 Posted February 21, 2006 Is he in ill health or close to dying? All depends on who he's locked up with I suppose. Maybe someone who doesn't quite share his views on free speech and freer history will turn him into weiner schnitzel. Crumbs!!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Guest Posted February 21, 2006 Either way, I don't see how you can decide who is worse. Irving because he's probably intelligent enough to realise what an idiot he is and he's still gone on fuelling moronic Nazis would be my opinion, but they're both scum. Who else should we ship off to a foreign jail? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dr Hackenslash 25 Posted February 21, 2006 The whole David Irving thing raises some disturbing questions regarding religion. If one were to raise the argument that the Nazis were merely punishing the Jews for killing Jesus Christ, and that they were justified to do so, then where do you stop. Given that the state of Israel was created because of a ridculous claim backed up by a book of fiction, who knows any more. But Judaism does seem to be given far more protection than any other religion - in fact, I think the only European countries where is is not a crime to deny the holocaust are the UK and the Rep of Ireland. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Harvester Of Souls 40 Posted February 21, 2006 It still exists Harv, but we have to be on guard. Indeed we do. I doubt it will see out the decade... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Harvester Of Souls 40 Posted February 21, 2006 Who else should we ship off to a foreign jail? Tony and George should be shipped off to Abu Ghraib. Think of it as penance for the puppet show we've endured for the last few years... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Canadian Paul 97 Posted February 21, 2006 Who else should we ship off to a foreign jail? Tony and George should be shipped off to Abu Ghraib. Think of it as penance for the puppet show we've endured for the last few years... Hey now, As for whose worse, I'd say Glitter. If you have an inch of intellect, you know Irving is wrong and you can turn him off. It's horribly offensive to you if you're related to a victim of the Holocaust, but you can fight back if you are in many different ways. Children can't fight back (at least most of the time), and the damage that is done can't be turned off or ignored. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Boudicca 702 Posted February 21, 2006 Why can't we put Evolution Deniers in prison? I've taken a leaf out of Irving's book and denied my overdraft. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Windsor 2,233 Posted February 21, 2006 Am I the only one annoyed with his arrest? For the past month or so most people have voiced support for 'freedom of expression' over the Muhammad cartoon. People believe that the cartoon should be allowed to be printed in the name of freedom of expression. Yet Irving doubts the use of gas chambers in the Holocaust and is locked away for three years. How can anyone justify this? Indeed, there are laws in many European countries banning this school of thought. In the end his claims were proven wrong but that is not the point. The point is that freedom of expression has been refused to this man at a time when the majority of Europeans are in support of that very freedom. It seems to me that this shows a case of extreme double standards.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tempus Fugit 214 Posted February 21, 2006 Am I the only one annoyed with his arrest? For the past month or so most people have voiced support for 'freedom of expression' over the Muhammad cartoon. People believe that the cartoon should be allowed to be printed in the name of freedom of expression. Yet Irving doubts the use of gas chambers in the Holocaust and is locked away for three years. How can anyone justify this? Indeed, there are laws in many European countries banning this school of thought. In the end his claims were proven wrong but that is not the point. The point is that freedom of expression has been refused to this man at a time when the majority of Europeans are in support of that very freedom. It seems to me that this shows a case of extreme double standards.... Quite right, those Austrian bastards. Who are they to lecture anyone on this subject, Holocaust memorial day is also a joke. It shouldn't be so specific, it should be a Genocide memorial day. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Star Crossed 33 Posted February 21, 2006 Why can't we put Evolution Deniers in prison? I've taken a leaf out of Irving's book and denied my overdraft. I deny the existence of my mortgage and my ex. I wonder what sort of hosiery David Irving wears? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Boudicca 702 Posted February 21, 2006 I imagine an important element of the punishment will involve the guards responding to Irving's complaints about being in prison with "No, you're not." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Life Begins at 5 o'clock 7 Posted February 21, 2006 Glitter was worse. His victims still suffer from the abuse. An idiot with no conception of the historical record isn't going to scar someone for life with his jackassitude. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Harvester Of Souls 40 Posted February 21, 2006 Am I the only one annoyed with his arrest? For the past month or so most people have voiced support for 'freedom of expression' over the Muhammad cartoon. People believe that the cartoon should be allowed to be printed in the name of freedom of expression. Yet Irving doubts the use of gas chambers in the Holocaust and is locked away for three years. How can anyone justify this? Indeed, there are laws in many European countries banning this school of thought. In the end his claims were proven wrong but that is not the point. The point is that freedom of expression has been refused to this man at a time when the majority of Europeans are in support of that very freedom. It seems to me that this shows a case of extreme double standards.... On the contrary, Windsor, I'm also upset that he's been denied his platform. I strongly disagree with his views, but in the very essence of free speech, I would defend, with my life, his right to say it. One of the problems, the world now faces, is that freedom of speech is a myth. It no longer exists. Numerous political and religious figures condemn it by claiming that should be limits on expression. With the return of the 'Glorification Of Terrorism' clause, in the UK, by taking a vocal stance against the government you can be found guilty of a crime and punished accordingly. Any form of political dissent has now been officially swept away. You will be assimilated. The incarceration of a deluded racist is no worse/better than the Islamic fundamentalist hysteria over a few badly drawn pictures. I accept that there is a responsibility where these freedoms are exercised, some cases it's ludicrous to exercise them but the right should be there. It's a dark day when in the space of a week a religious cult and an elected government exercise their collective might and kill off what's left of any form of alternative opinion. We're now a nation of subjects once again. We will do as we're told by our betters. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Life Begins at 5 o'clock 7 Posted February 21, 2006 An old American adage has it that those who trade freedom for security deserve neither. Ben Franklin I think. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
M Busby Airlines 7 Posted February 22, 2006 Mods in the interests of housework,would it not be wise to merge all the David Irving/What would you deny threads into one?. Easier to keep an eye on the rancid c**t. 67 & 3 years in prision - with the Austrian prosecutor looking for more,decent bet for 2008 ?. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dr Hackenslash 25 Posted February 22, 2006 The whole David Irving idea raises the issue of revisionist historians. Winston Churchill's alleged quote still stands true today. "History will treat me well, because I will be the one writing it!" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Magere Hein 1,400 Posted February 22, 2006 But Judaism does seem to be given far more protection than any other religion - in fact, I think the only European countries where is is not a crime to deny the holocaust are the UK and the Rep of Ireland. It's not a crime in The Netherlands. On the contrary, Windsor, I'm also upset that he's been denied his platform. I strongly disagree with his views, but in the very essence of free speech, I would defend, with my life, his right to say it. I agree. And yes, free speech in the "Free" World is dying fast, if not already dead. regards, Hein Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dr Hackenslash 25 Posted February 22, 2006 But Judaism does seem to be given far more protection than any other religion - in fact, I think the only European countries where is is not a crime to deny the holocaust are the UK and the Rep of Ireland. It's not a crime in The Netherlands. I stand corrected, but I'm not surprised that The Netherlands is also in the small group. Before other countries are mentoned I should point out that, by Europe, I meant Western Europe as opposed to the new lot, whose laws still have a few Soviet-bloc aspects about them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
