Holocaust Revisionist Released From Austrian Prison

“ expressing his views “ ? ………………. UTTER TWADDLE.

He went to Austria , as a foreign national ….. in an attempt to “ make a point “ , and IMHO more importantly stick two fingers up at the Austrian government .

It backfired , and quite rightly so …. With the Austrian authorities exercising their rights to prosecute violations of their laws.

As I said , when in Rome………….

I have never been to Austria , but have spent considerable time in other countries

I am in the UK, and as H.M.G. has passed no laws on the issue , I own 3 copes of “ mien kamph “ , and several other moderately valuable items of NAZI era memorabilia

When in Bahrain , I didn’t drink…………despite the fact there was a thriving ex-pat black market in booze , partly because I was afraid of getting 5 lashes , if caught……. But mostly because I was a guest in their country …. And they were paying me 27k PA tax free , with a gratis flat , for a job I earned 14k doing in blighty

I felt that sort of generosity gave them a right to impose certain restrictions 

Iran has just hosted a “ conference of idiots “ [ strictly my personal opinion of them ] addressing these issues , and despite the derision I cast on the participants ……… I do respect their right to go and be idiots ……… IN Iran, not Austria .

And that is why I believe that IRVINE should have been kept in a small cold camp cell for the full term of his sentence ………… because he chose to go to Austria and violate their laws.

An Austrian national , who did not have the means to leave the country , would have some limited legitimacy to claims that his free speech was being suppressed ………. But as I opined earlier ………. Membership of a civilized society requires that we accept its strictures , in return for the benefits .

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
“ expressing his views “ ? ………………. UTTER TWADDLE.

Well, what are they if not his views? Irving's charges relate to speeches he made in their country in 1989. No fresh charges were laid while he was there in 2005.

He went to Austria , as a foreign national ….. in an attempt to “ make a point “ , and IMHO more importantly stick two fingers up at the Austrian government .

Fair enough, that's your opinion. What about Ernst Zundel? Do you also support the kidnapping of a Canadian National to Germany where he is incarcerated for twenty years?

It backfired , and quite rightly so …. With the Austrian authorities exercising their rights to prosecute violations of their laws.

Yes, with a verdict that has been denounced by many in Austria and abroard as being "heavy-handed" and an "example trial." You could say that imprisoning Irving "back-fired" on the Austrian authorities.

The New York Post, a friend of the Jewish cause, found room for both a column by Eric Fettman under the head line "Wrong Answer - Jailing a Holocaust Denier" and a column by George Will, himself a philo-Semite, describing Mr. Irving's imprisonment as "indefensible" and a "folly." The Daily News, owned by a former chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, Mortimer Zuckerman, ran out a column by Richard Cohen condemning Austria's decision as "fascist." We can understand the reasoning; our own Hillel Halkin wrote a column a couple of weeks ago arguing that laws against Holocaust denial are counterproductive. The Wall Street Journal, which has been heroic in its defense of Israel, ran both a column by Christopher Hitchens calling Mr.Irving's imprisonment a "disgrace" and an editorial claiming, "By imprisoning Mr.Irving, Austria has now forced serious people to come to the principled defense of a detestable man."

Link

And that is why I believe that IRVINE should have been kept in a small cold camp cell for the full term of his sentence ………… because he chose to go to Austria and violate their laws.

And they deemed that after making an example of Irving, he should be released. Yet you seem to disagree with them on that point.

Don't you think about how this prison term has made a martyr of Irving? It has made him more popular, with both the Right and Left. For the Fascist Right, he is a man of truth, unfairly imprisoned. For the Left, a man denied his basic freedoms. His profile has been higher in the last couple of years than ever before.

Originally posted by Muaddib
BTW, trying to link this to "9/11" is amusing to say the least"....

It would be amusing if it were not so close to the truth. I recently watched a BBC 1 documentary called "9/11 Didn't Happen". It is an attempt by it's creators to debunk any 9/11 researcher as a crack-pot and a possible neo-nazi.

Centring their focus on mainly German 9/11 "conspiracy theorists",
the rationale is that many of the 9/11 researchers in Europe (and elsewhere) are closet anti-semites. As they can no longer attack the Jews by denying the Holocaust without incurring a prison sentence, these writers are venting their hatred through the belief in a Zionist conspiracy being behind 9/11.

Never mind the fact that none of the writers portrayed have ever written any anti-semitic diatribes.

The jailing of 9/11 researchers in the EU may not be as far fetched as some think.