More on David Irving's imprisonment.

I've been reading a few posts from US blogs which express a bit of Voltaire's "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." philosophy.

Personally, I think there is a bit more to it than that. Free speech comes with a degree of responsibility. Jumping up and down proclaiming things that are simply not true is not exercising free speech, but simply jumping up and down proclaiming untruths.

In the US recently, mad cleric Pat Robertson suggested assasinating a legitimate head of state (Hugo Chavez). Should this be defended to the death?

David Irving hasn't exercised responsibility in his misguided beliefs. David has written approximately 30 books on the topic. They fly in the face of insurmountable evidence. David also spends a great deal of time on a public speaking circuit inciting hatred with some extremely questionable organisations.

Is this free speech in spirit or simply making a living out of abusing it and inciting hatred?

On the other side of the coin, we also need to understand the Austrians & Germans, who committed these atrocities. The jews themselves refer to the holocaust a great deal, and is now a significant part of their national identity. The holocaust is also a very large & recent black mark on a proud german people's history.

The laws that David has been charged with were enacted not long after WW2. These laws have helped the Germans come to terms with what really happened by disallowing such garbage to circulate legitimately.

Many say that to counter such crap is to merely debunk it. To show the effectiveness of that approach, I give you the continunce of the Bush administration.

Freedom of speech comes with responsibilities. David Irving wasn't and isn't responsible with that freedom. He lost his for 3 years as a result.

=my2c
BC