world

Holocaust denier tours Nazi sites in Poland

20 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2010 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

20 Comments
Login to comment

I wonder whether this mate has a loosen screw up there.

The German has admitted of such atrocities for their misdeed in the WWII what is the real reason for him to deny Holocaust?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Does he REALLY deny the Holocaust? I always hear about people accused of denying the Holocaust for questioning any detail of official events. Claim it was some other gas than Zyklon B, they label you a Holocaust denier.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The denial tour...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Gee, how long for denying the existence of God? What century is this? I deny the existence of the color blue and door handles. how do you like those apples? changed my mind... no apples either.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I applaud the foresight Eisenhower had when first confronted by the realities of these death camps. He insisted on as much film and photographs of the atrocites be made and that as many people as possible be made to witness it so that nobody in the future could ever deny it ever happened.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"I applaud the foresight Eisenhower had when first confronted by the realities of these death camps"

KakiOko, for sure!

And a great highway construction policy as well.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

A very dear friend of mine was involved in the liberation of Belsen. He told me that they could smell the death from five miles away.

He had not a great deal of sympathy for Holocaust deniers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I don't agree with what he thinks or says, but....

So much for the idea of DEMOCRACY and FREEDOM OF SPEECH... one can say what one believes without fear of prosecution.

It's obvious that some European countries are far behind the times.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yes you can make racial comments and some people will agree with them, that isn't illegal in poland either. What is illegal there is denying the holocaust ever happened.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bobcatfish: There is a slight difference between denying the color blue and denying the death of someone (let alone millions).

For example, if (heaven forbid) your child were murdered, and you went through all the anguish, anger, mourning, and guilt, and then the reluctant acceptance, only to have someone write a book or post on the internet that your child really did not die, or die in the way you say, how would that sit with you? Denying the existence of blue is loony; denying the confirmed murder of a child is loony and mean. That is to say, it borders on assault, or at least harrassment. Now multiply that by millions.

This all said, I am a big fan of the right to free speech, and would prefer that each mean loony were sued by particular groups of perceived victims for particular statements, and that he or she would be judged in a court of law. Similarly, I would prefer that blanket bans on the national level did not exist, as they tend to stifle genuine research and academic debate. But alas, upholding idealism takes a distant back seat to the widespread recognition and understanding of the gravity of the Holocaust.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

ilcun76; Britain is where Irving comes from and holocaust denial is not illegal. Is Britain behind the times?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This jackass isn't the only one. Iran's leader comes to mind. And therein lies the problem. You get people with influence over others to repeat and spread these denials and people do start to question the realities. History is littered with cases where the subsequent passing of time totally eradicated or twisted what truly happened. It's easy to say 'harmless lunatic' but too often their results are not harmless.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Its all a question of what the truth is. According to me, the truth is the Nazis did not..."

For me, and many others, the truth is purely objective. There is no room for subjectivity, as in "According to me, the truth is..." Where you and I agree is that governments should not ban research and publishing on historical events which question the official view of the Holocaust. I, however, say this in the hopes that we arrive at an even clearer picture of something we can already largely make out. It seems you say this to be free to deny the picture even exists.

So be it. I'll fight for your right to say something I completely disagree with, something absurd, or even something that will land you in court.

My point is that historians should be free to tweak the official version of events, but of course must back it up with loads of evidence, which necessitates being allowed to gather that evidence. If the odd revisionist pops up, well, it's a small price to pay for access to the greater truth. If that revisionist in some way writes something that offends people, let those people sue him for damages, etc, and let the court decide if it's free speech or hate speech. But for governments to presuppose that all questions regarding historical truth are without merit, I'm sorry, but that just has a faint odour of totalitarianism, something that I assume they are trying to avoid returning to.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

ilcun76: "It's obvious that some European countries are far behind the times."

Compared to what... denying history and repeating what happened 60 years ago? I would call such lack of progress and learning as far behind the times, at the very least.

I wonder what this guy will say... will he claim it's all a hoax and that it was put up a mere few years ago to try and dupe 'intellects' like himself? When they prove its age and the blood stains, etc., will he still claim it's all fake? I hope they nab him denying the holocaust while he's there and throw him in the klink for three years. You cannot change these people -- they are stupid from whenever it is ignorance became their means of seeing things, but you can teach them that it's not acceptable to say certain things in certain places, and that it should never be. An opinion can be neither right nor wrong save to the subject making it, but facts can certainly be, and this man needs to get his facts straight.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

My point is that historians should be free to tweak the official version of events, but of course must back it up with loads of evidence, which necessitates being allowed to gather that evidence.

Yes, I agree completely. However, when you provide evidence that goes against the official version, you go to jail. Only evidence that supports the official version is allowed in Europe, and on this forum.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Does he REALLY deny the Holocaust?

He claimed all along that he is not a holocaust expert. He is an expert on the Nazi regime, and if I recall he claims that if there was a Holocaust, Hitler did not know, he saw nothing in the documents he studied to support it (e.g., no orders related to it).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

An opinion can be neither right nor wrong save to the subject making it, but facts can certainly be, and this man needs to get his facts straight.

Indeed, but what I have seen from Zundel's first trial in Canada and in various discussions (e.g., this forum) is that many are so certain that the Holocaust happened exactly is they say it did, but cannot provide any proof. They always bring up the "mountains of evidence" but cannot bring one concrete and convincing example to prove there was a plan to systematically exterminate European Jews. I agree that people should get their facts straight.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Too bad they didnt invite Ahmedinejad to join the tour.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Poland's law forbidding denial of the holocaust is in violation of article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union which entered into force with the Lisbon Treaty. Article 11 guarantees "the right to freedom of expression, the freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers".

That seems quite clear to me. It also means that similar German and Austrian laws are also invalid, as are other laws which try to prevent "hate" speech.

I don't wish to defend Mr Irving; I've been to Auschwitz and found it a very grim experience. However, the European governments that were so keen to enact the Lisbon Treaty, without putting it to a referendum in most cases, should now be forced to comply with it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

and on this forum.

The longevity of your subsequent post on the subject show this to be otherwise.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites