On Mon, 2006-03-13 at 09:23 +0000, Michael T D Nelson wrote: > Jan Depner wrote: > > On Sun, 2006-03-12 at 17:18 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > > > >>On Sunday 12 March 2006 15:55, Lee Revell wrote: > >> > >>>On Sun, 2006-03-12 at 09:11 -0800, Maluvia wrote: > >>> > >>>>>Yes, and one such absolute value is "free speech". > >>>>> > >>>>>Lee > >>>> > >>>>Tell that to David Irving. > >>>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4733820.stm > >>> > >>>Yes, it's unfortunate that he was locked up. Most Americans are > >>>appalled by it. Holocaust deniers are free to make idiots out of > >>>themselves in the US. > >>> > >> > > [stuff written by Gene snipped] > > > Gene, > > > > The article in question stated that the guy had said in 1989 that he > > didn't believe that the Holocaust was actually as bad as portrayed and > > that there were no gas chambers at Auschwitz. He said at the recent > > trial that after he had read Eichmann's diary he had reformed his > > opinion and now believed that the Holocaust was as portrayed by most > > mainstream historians and that there were gas chambers at Auschwitz. > > And then he came out of court and promptly altered his opinion again. > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4757506.stm > > ******************** > "Given the ruthless efficiency of the Germans, if there was an > extermination programme to kill all the Jews, how come so many > survived?" he said. > > When asked whether there was an organised programme to exterminate the > Jews in Europe, overseen by Hitler, Irving told Today: "That is > absolutely wrong and nobody can justify that. " > ******************** > > > He > > seems to be one of those people who needs indisputable evidence to buy > > into something. At least he is intelligent enough to look at proof and > > change his opinion. > > Really? I don't believe that he's changed his mind at all. His story > changes in court, then it changes again the minute he steps outside. Hmm... > You didn't read the article very well. He is being jailed for denying the Holocaust. That's what the (IMO stupid) law is about. He now says that he believes the Holocaust happened. What he said is that no one so far can prove that Hitler was the instigator. Personally I think he's a nut job but the charge is denying the Holocaust, the law is denying the Holocaust, all he's saying now is that he doesn't think Hitler was the main mover and shaker behind it. That, as far as I can tell, is not against the law. It's also not against the law to question the number of people killed since no one has any real solid figures since they didn't keep really good records (that weren't destroyed). > > Of course, they're still putting him in prison for > > three years which, in my opinion, is dumb as a door knob. > > Well, not everyone believes that "freedom of speech" is more important > than everything else. > In any free country freedom of speech is probably *the* most important right. We're losing it here. Apparently it's already lost in Austria and 11 other European countries. > He broke the law publicly. What do you expect them to do? > Fix the stupid law. Did you note the last comment on the whole thing? By putting this moron in jail they're bringing attention to his views. If they'd left him in his own fantasy world no one would have paid attention to him except for the already deluded. This reminds me of McDonalds suing the owners of the web sites that were saying they put ground up worms in their hamburgers. Until McDonalds sued them most people had never heard of this stupid claim. After they sued we all got to hear about it. -- Jan 'Evil Twin' Depner The Fuzzy Dice http://myweb.cableone.net/eviltwin69/fuzzy.html "As we enjoy great advantages from the invention of others, we should be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours, and this we should do freely and generously." Benjamin Franklin, on declining patents offered by the governor of Pennsylvania for his "Pennsylvania Fireplace", c. 1744
