Battleangel

Thanks a lot. Now the talk of the town is that Europe in stifling free speech. Why? Largely because the ludicrous detainment of the British historian David Irving for “Holocaust denial” in Austria (for 15 year old alleged speeches no less). And who do we have to thank for this? The Holocaust Industry of course. And while they have applauded the Irving case per se, I do not see them rushing to refute this slanderous piece of journalism, despite their role in lobbying and producing such “denial” laws. It’s a real win-win situation for them. If Austria (and “Europe”, guilt by association right?) had let Irving be, it would have been the top story of their yearly summation of “anti-semitism” in Europe. Now it’s “Europe must embrace true free speech” instead.

CSM – In Europe, five years into the 21st century, two writers face trial and imprisonment for something they said or wrote. Both could be incarcerated, not for physically harming another person or for damaging property, but for uttering words that European states deem offensive.

Yet only one has been defended by the international literati, who have described the attempt to curtail his freedom of speech as an act of “anachronistic brutality.” The other writer’s plight has been ignored; worse, many liberals have supported the campaign to punish him for expressing outrageous views.

As such, the two cases cast a harsh light on the debate about free speech in Europe: They suggest we Europeans have a partial, picky attitude to freedom of expression, and thus do not understand the real meaning of this fundamental liberty.

The writers are Orhan Pamuk, a Turkish novelist, and David Irving, a British historian.

Notwithstanding the fact that Turkey isn’t strictly “in Europe” and that their membership into the EU is pending EXACTLY these sort of practises, it is ironic that Pamuk’s plight is in essence refuting the denial of the Armenian genocide (or “holocaust” if you will, but not a “Holocaust”). This denial is something that the Holocaust Industry, most notably Elie Wiesel and the Israeli government, have been wilful participants to. Rule number one for Holocaust Industrialists, the Holocaust (capital “H”) is unique. Don’t question it. Don’t compare.

Sure, the piece of journalism above slanders Irving and his work, but at least it recognizes the importance of free speech. Even when it is something that we don’t want to hear or something that hurts political leverage, as is the case with the Holocaust. Regardless of what one believes, the fundamental conclusion must be that one never protects human rights and promotes liberty by stifling them. People who make a claim to the contrary have ulterior motives for doing so. Whether it be clamping down on “anti-semitism” or fighting the “terrorists” of late. It’s really that simple.

Also in the news:

• Let Ernst Zundel and David Irving Go Home – Similar verbal attack against Irving, yet manages to come to a conclusion of free speech.
• Holocaust Conference Soon in Teheran – The capital “H” variety. So Armenians are out of luck again. It’s quite ironic really.