Independent Media Centre Ireland

Nazi Irving On Rte Late Late: Emergency Protest Tonite 8.30 Rte

category dublin | miscellaneous | news report author Friday March 07, 2008 14:29author by Sara - ANL

The Anti Nazi League is calling on RTE Late Late Show to withdraw its invitation to Holocausr Revisionist David Irving for tonight's show
An Emergency Protest Picket is to be held at 8.30pm tonight (Friday 7th March at RTE's Montrose TV entrance to oppose Irving's appearance.

The Anti-Nazi League has called on RTE’s Late Late Show to withdraw its invitation to Holocuast revisionist David Irving to appear on tonight’s show (March 7th).
The Anti-Nazi League was made aware of the invitation to Mr Irving when Richard Boyd Barrett was contacted by the Late Late Show and asked to debate with David Irving on the show.
Richard Boyd Barrett refused the invitation and appealed to the Late Late Show to withdraw the invitation to Mr Irving. He then contacted the Anti-Nazi League.
The Anti-Nazi League will hold a picket at RTE tonight at 8.30pm to oppose the appearance of Mr Irving on the Late Late Show.
Sarah O’ Rourke of the Anti- Nazi League said:

“We are appealing to the Late Late Show and the RTE authorities to cancel the planned appearance of David Irving on tonight’s show.
One of the most respected shows on Irish Television and Ireland’s national broadcaster should not being giving a platform to someone who wishes to deny the horror of the Nazi Holocaust, which claimed the lives of six million Jews and other minorities.

David Irving has rightly been convicted in the British and Austrian courts for his views on the holocaust. By giving this man a platform the Late Late Show is promoting someone who is apologist for fascism and a crime against humanity. This is an affront to the memory of the six million people that were massacred by the Nazis.

This is not matter a of “fee speech.” The question is whether the Late Late Show or RTE wish to help promote the views of someone who denies the horror of the Nazi Holocaust. Whether or not the holocaust took place and its genocidal character is not a matter for debate. It is a fact. By allowing Mr Irving to speak the Late Late Show are conveying the message that the horror of the holocaust is matter of dispute rather than one of the greatest crimes of human history. Nor is this just a matter of what happened in the past, Mr Irving wishes to downplay the crimes of Nazism in order to rehabilitate fascism as a political movement today.”

Comments (63 of 63)

Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63
author by -publication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 14:47author address author phone

The Late Late Show has always been a bastion of Debate, and a hotbed of controversy. Remember the bishop and the nightie ? That was considered unpalatable at the time. Issues like Womens Liberation were founded on media offered by the Late Late Show. The ANL can protest away, but if you succeed in having Irving removed from the show's lineup, then you effectively wind up the late late show. I for one look forward to hearing what he has to say, and I am sure that most people will be willing to ignore his claptrap. By all means protest his appearence, but dont have him removed.

author by Anti Fascistpublication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 14:52author address author phone

Its good to the see the return of the ANL after several years. The problem is that like many other SWP Fronts it has no independent existence.

This is the first indication that genuine and independent anti racists and fascists have had which shows that the SWP are interested in confronting Irving. It is welcome.

But if the SWP really want to play a positive role in this struggle then I suggest they link up with those who have being organising opposition to Irving for the last 2 weeks. The SWP will not be allowed to take over the campaign at this stage.

Unity will stop Irving.

author by Honest manpublication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 15:01author address author phone

Can we leave the overly dramatic language to the tabloid newspapers. "Emergency Protest" this is not an emergency. No one will die if this protest does not occur. You are spouting the kind of garbage we have come accustomed to with the reality TV generation.

It is also a blatant lie to suggest that RTÉ is promoting the views of Irving. As you yourself stated they have invited an alternative view to debate him. A debate is meant to allow both sides of an argument to be heard and your side has refused to take part, that is not the fault of Irving or the Late Late.

Are you as keen to protest everytime someone covers up the genocide which took place against the Irish people from 1845 to 1849? The genocide which all parties dishonestly call a Famine -despite the fact that only one crop failed and there was plenty of good food in the country which was taken by the British. No we dont argue we just get on with life and maybe some other races could learn from that.

Of course Irving is wrong, and of course you have the right to protest but try to do so with some honesty and consistency!

author by Pseudonympublication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 15:14author address author phone

"Rightly Convicted"

Sara, what you have done is set laws around freedom of thought. Your crowd are a fringe of a fringe. Your "no free speech for fascists" has a very flawed logic. Ireland is enjoying a period of enlightenment, and a speech in UCC and an appearence on the Late Late show will not stimulate a massive Nazi uprising in Irish public. Mr Boyd Barrett is a well spoken and intelligent individual, who could counter the arguments of Mr Irving, who is a less than credible historian. However, based on a principle Barrett will not shout him down. Thus Irving will be unchallanged or will be countered by somebody of the "plastic proletariat" i.e somebody from the Labour Party.

Stopping Irving is not the answer. He will still be there and will find media.

author by The Workers' Partypublication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 15:24author address author phone

The Workers’ Party have called on the authorities of University College Cork to withdraw the invitation to the Nazi apologist and holocaust denier David Irving who is due to address a meeting of the UCC Philosophical Society next Monday night.

Spokesman Ted Tynan also called on RTÉ to cancel a scheduled appearance on the Late Late Show tonight for Mr. Irving saying it amounted to official recognition for Irving as a reputable historian when the facts show that he is a distorter of history.

“The invitation to Mr. Irving to speak at the UCC Philosoph, the third time he has been invited by this body, is nothing more than a cheap publicity stunt but has already given oxygen to neo-nazis who have been organising around the visit for the last number of weeks. There is already a small Nazi nucleus in the city of Cork and it has been invigorated by the proposed Irving visit. If the Philosophical Society cannot act like responsible adults then the UCC Governing Body must do so and uphold the reputation of the university”, said Mr. Tynan.

Mr. Tynan said that Pat Kenny’s invitation to Irving to appear on tonight’s Late Late Show was the icing on the cake for Irving’s visit. “Wasting licence-payers money on giving airtime to a holocaust denier who has been discredited several times and jailed by authorities in Austria for breaching anti-fascist laws is a gross abuse of RTÉs position. Considering Pat Kenny is paid more than €800,000 per annum by RTÉ out of licence fee money one would hope that his show would provide better entertainment than giving airtime to someone like Irving”.

The Workers’ Party spokesman said his party would be supporting protests at RTÉ’s Donnybrook studios in Dublin tonight and he called for a strong public turnout at Monday night’s protests at UCC against the Irving visit.

Related Link:
author by no platformpublication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 15:45author address author phone

Is this a blocade to stop him getting in that might actually have a useful role, and worth giving up a friday night for, or is it a tokenistic gesture to express "disgust" in which case i will leave it to the liberals and their candals?

Also why the late notice in letting people know? Were the late late show offering only a few hours notice to RBB?

author by socialistpublication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 16:31author address author phone

Absolutely. Protest against Irving and providing him with a platform. I totally agree. All the way!

However the SWP does itself no favours with the dishonesty and hyperbole above. Boyd Barrett "contacted the Anti-Nazi League"? You mean he talked to mimself? The ANL doesn't exist. It's a fiction of the SWP's imagination - a front occasionally used for media purposes. Sarah O'Rourke, for example, is a member of the SWP wheeled out for the occasion. It seems like the SWP are just embarrassed to call demos under their own name.

Anyhow, just to say I hate this type of dishonesty. It does the left no favours.

That said, get to the demo!!!

author by @publication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 16:59author address author phone

8.30pm front gates of RTE.

You can get the following buses from town:

10/A | 118 | 145 | 18 | 32x | 41x | 46A/B/C/D/E/N/X 58C/X 746 | 7B/D 84x |

author by -publication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 17:07author address author phone

they have forwarded mine to PK's Staff.

it threatens the licence fee.... I do not think enough people are
doing this as quite simply, they had time not alone to read mine
but to respond to it. am too ill to go tonight, but people should.
+pat kenny should not get away with cheap nasty, adolescent
self-publicity in this manner.

how fucking dare he?

author by Free Thinkerpublication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 17:11author address author phone

Why did Richard Boyd Barrett turn down debating Mr.Irving? Surely to confront him on the issues instead of screaming and shouting outside RTE's Montrose TV entrance would be more intelligent.
I'm sure the 'Anti-Fascist' Fascists will out in force to stifle this expression of Freedom on the part of David Irving and RTE.

Seriously there are far more important topics that require protests and activism then David Irving appearing on the Late Late Show. When will the morons at the Anti-Nazi league learn you can't combat something by emulating it. Behaving like Brown Shirt thugs and intimidating people who have committed the crime of thinking differently and expressed that crime will not further your cause.

Also most people who oppose David Irving seem to stuck in the left paradigm I wonder if Mr.Irving was claiming that the communist regimes of the Soviet Union and China had not been responsible for nearly 100 million deaths would they be protesting. As-well 11 million people dies in the Nazi Eugenics program not just the 6 million Jews stated in the 'Anti-Nazi' League statement.

It's funny these fanatics who call for an ''Emergency Protest'' think they are different from the other fanatics who tried to stop the the Late Late Show from letting critics of the Roman Church. Why do some people think it's their right and duty to impose their views on others and stifle other people from expressing differing points of view.

author by w. - WSM (pers cap)publication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 17:49author address author phone

RBB was right not to get involved in RTEs circus. No platform for fascists.

author by anti facistpublication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 18:19author address author phone

Email RTE to complain.

I emailed and got a reply within a half hour. Register your disgust. Well done to RBB- Right decision. No platform for fascists.

author by Debbie Lipsynchpublication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 19:24author address author phone

Whats with the bent out of shape censorship brigade ?

Deborah Lipstadt, upon hearing of Irving's sentence to three years' imprisonment, said, "I am not happy when censorship wins, and I don't believe in winning battles via censorship… The way of fighting Holocaust deniers is with history and with truth."

author by Honest manpublication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 19:41author address author phone

Free thinker how could you expect common sense from the Anti Nazi League, when they themselves are acting like modern nazi's assuming that they have the right to determine what people can and cannot think. Little do they know that as soon as the right to censorship wins, they will be the first bunch of screaming lunatics to be censored, and sadly this website will probably get the chop too.

Censorship of any sort is wrong regardless of which side it comes from.

Sadly these morons have a burning desire to feel important and to tell everybody what to think. Sounds like a little Austrian boy who went on to become the leader of Germany and led them into war. His name escapes me!

author by Slartibuckfastpublication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 19:54author address author phone

Why do people constantly drone on that the Nazis slaughtered only six million people? Is that not denying the full horror of it all too? Can they not think a wee bit in future before they come out with that?

Did that looper Irvine not admit he was wrong a while back? Or was that a ploy to get out of jail?

author by Donpublication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 20:04author address author phone

Why Richard Boyd Barret? Doe she have a history Phd or something? I've never read Irvines stuff so I'll watch tonight. Should be amusing. I hope they get a real historian in to counter point him. Historic revisionists are entertaining for history nuts like myself.

"Treat others as you would like to be treated". Free speech for all.

author by Slartibuckfastpublication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 20:10author address author phone

"Why did Richard Boyd Barrett turn down debating Mr.Irving? Surely to confront him on the issues instead of screaming and shouting outside RTE's Montrose TV entrance would be more intelligent."

I know. You'd think his crap was too dangerous to be told instead of just being crap. The stupidity of appearing to fear him is unfathomable.

author by Slartibuckfastpublication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 20:13author address author phone

Maybe they should get Senator Harris on as well and let him trot out his history of the nice Black and Tan and we can ring in and vote which one is more entertaining as a moonchild.

author by Montypublication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 20:19author address author phone

Wow! What a country it would be if these people held sway. You think Michael McDowell was bad? This lot with their rent a mob censorship is out of control. It's a good job they are so minute and meaningless.

Don't try to tell the rest of us who we should and shouldn't listen to. This is still a free country and not one of you Stalinist/ Maoist goulags where a gang can decide what the rest of the people must do, hear and think.

If Gorge Bushs Homeland Security tried a stunt like this you would call them fascists and totalitarian bigots and you would be correct to do so. Now what should we call you?

author by A10publication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 20:42author address author phone

We can get all het up about some crackpot academic.But we cant work up the enthausim to bitch and moan and demonstrate about our bunch of corrupt politicans who are screwing us day in and out.Wonder where our piroritiesare here in Ireland

author by paul o toolepublication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 21:35author address author phone

With so many more important issues to debate right now in Ireland what else do you think RTE (Refuse to Tell the Electorate)would have done.
They use a controversy to deflect attention from the ongoing corruption by our most corrupt government ever, which is the real debate RTE wish to aviod. They have succeeded in deflection already it would seem.
With Harney onthe ropes over a myriad of problems in the 'health' service just in the last week, Berties lies deceptions and cloak and dagger approach to the Mahon tribunal, another 1,040 billion giveaway of yours and mine resources, the anniversary of the Irish participatation in genocide in Iraq, theres a lot for RTE to do help our government to continnue on their self serving disgusting journey and maintain media silence.
By the way, who is Irving, any quotes from this guy, surely he will fall on his own sword, which would be the logical outcome of his Anti-Jewish sentiments. Let him disgrace himself and mourne the fact that by next week Harneys and Berties problems will have passed on from the radar under RTE's noses.

author by Tim Waterstonepublication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 22:27author address author phone

The reason Irving is on tv is to plug his books. Over the weekend make sure your local bookshop does not stock any.

author by McLuhanpublication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 23:17author address author phone

I think sadly some people on this forum suffer from a quite pavlovian stupidity! Just ignore creatures like Irving. They thrive on controversy but wither when ignored. Your protest will help encourage and generate income for Irving. Yes, his appearance on rte will do so too but this is a deeper malaise with our national broadcaster which is only fuelled by such protests. It gives them ratings and encourages them to do the same kind of thing again. Its all about appeasement of the powerful, an unhealthy focus on ratings (despite a high license fee), and a philosophy of prioritising "bread and circuses" for the masses rather than serving their interests.

Yes, of course we should be discussing more pressing issues instead of giving prime time media time over to a nutcase self publicist.

However, the price of free speech is allowing it to people we'd sooner not be associated with and whose opinions are not ones we would agree with. Vested interests make sure the war for free speech is usually fought in unsavoury areas like pornography, paedophilia and naziism and in defending free speech, you are associated with these unsavoury people. Its not nice but we must not be deflected by these tactics. There is a never ending stream of stories of how such and such a pervert used the internet to hurt the children. I'm sure they used the phone and the mail too. Do we clamp down on those? The powers that be would like nothing more than to police the internet if we are stupid enough to let them. Witness the new data retention policies coming in next month!

I don't agree that if a sensibly prioritised list of people who need to be heard was drawn up, that mr Irving would figure very highly. That is the real issue here. However that is because of the the malaise in RTE, not David Irvings wide following. Fix that malaise and you will not often see the likes of him gracing our tv sets in the future, not because he is being censored but because more important and relevant voices need to be heard before he does.

However, reality is, RTE is broken and he will be put on to generate controversy. So let the daft asshole speak and don't be drawn. Just ignore his crap if you don't agree with it. Thats the price of freedom, if you really believe you have it!!

If you must write to RTE , write in complaining about their pathetic coverage of real issues in our lives, pathetically limited time on programs like Q&A where people are just gagging to discuss things for longer and there are high watching stats, their biased coverage of iraq war, and biased meagre coverage regarding shannon, rossport and other issues, their simpering sycophantic behaviour towards those in power, and the ridiculous salaries of conservative gits like pat kenny wasting our hard earned license money.

Perhaps eamonn ryans mutterings will change things but more likely its a ruse to raise the license fee whilst churning out a few extra cheap yuppie interior decorating shows and daft cooking programs. Fuck the media. I hate it with a vengeance

author by Ceannpublication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 23:35author address author phone

It's no wonder Boyd Barrett refused the invitation. What would he have said on stage on the late late tonight? At least that UCD guy can argue points with Irving.

So was it that bad that Irving was involved in a debate on state tv? I'm sure people should be allowed make their own minds up. I'd say a large majority of the late late viewers disagreed with Irving. Why the need for protests?

author by Bikerpublication date Fri Mar 07, 2008 23:51author address author phone

The guy from UCD was hopeless. He was out of his depth with Irving who may be an apologist for fascism, but he's a clever one. It is not about ordinary thinking people being swayed by him that we need to be worried about, it is some bonehead that either wants to drive out all non-Irish (especially non-whites) out of Ireland or wants to be part of a little nazi cell where he can feel self-important - these are the types that Irving impresses and they're the ones that can meet fellow boneheads through Irving's group of followers.

author by Cian (WSM Personal cap.)publication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 00:04author address author phone

Pat Kenny gave Irving free reign to interrupt the other speakers whenever he felt like it. Pat should give a public apology on the next Late Late for such a cowardly performance. RTE should be ashamed of themselves for stooping to this. The speaker from the audience put it very well - this is not a freedom of speech issue - Irving was being given a platform, plain and simple.

author by Ceannpublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 00:09author address author phone

What was bad about Irving being on the TV tonight? I don't predict nazis to descend during the night after this. It will be forgotton about within a week. I don't think his appearance has changed anything in Ireland. It's no big deal.

author by Viewerpublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 00:13author address author phone

Surprisingly, Irving spoke reasonably well for the notion of freedom of speech and the right to be wrong. The UCD guy started off ok but his bias showed towards the end and he did not show up irvings arguments very well. I think somebody better could have been found to counterbalance him on the show.

I found the interview pretty harmless. But it was good to see people talking about documents, dates and specific data, (at least a little bit! ) instead of the one sided emotive discussions you usually get, usually peppered with emotive terms. And in the end it was more about freedom of speech than anything. (Perhaps they'll cover protestors views on the sell off of our resources and data retention next week!)

Perhaps people are afraid of just talking about these issues in a factual way. They are still too tied up in hype and emotion. Definitely not enough people talk about the 20 million russians killed by german troops, and whose sacrifice we have largely to thank for the defeat of germany. Why do they figure so much less than the 6 million jewish people. Is one russian worth 3.3 jewish people? Certainly the documented treatment of jewish people at the hands of the germans was terrible. But the massacre of russian citizens on the eastern front and during the awful siege of stalingrad was terrible too. And there were lots more of them. Personally I'm not too fond of Israel's activities in lebanon and gaza. It seems the abused become abusers themselves.

It seems that cold facts in this world account for little. The word Holocaust is a brand name now and fear of the term "Anti Semitic" is a cloak under which you can hide a multitude of sins

and PR is everything.

author by Stephen Boyd - Socialist Partypublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 00:19author address author phone

The decision by the UCC Philosophical Society to cancel Irving is a victory for anti-fascism and anti-racism in Ireland. On four occasions we have now stopped the Philosoph from having a fascist speak in UCC.
Pat Kenny should never have had the Nazi Irving on his show, but in the event that he did he could have least have had the decency to challenge Irving about his fascist beliefs and connections, instead he gave him an easy ride.
Well done to everyone who campaigned to stop the nazi Irving!

author by Anti-fascistpublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 00:23author address author phone

Richard Boyd Barrett refused to speak on the Late Late Show tonight because he was speaking at a meeting in Cork with Halliday.

author by Davidianpublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 00:37author address author phone

The problem is he hasn't gone away. He will still be in Ireland underground meeting with sympathisers. As if he was ever going to turn UCC students in the first place.

author by Charles B.publication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 00:39author address author phone

Shouldn't that be 'is one jew worth 3.3 russians?
But aside from that, this response to his appeareance is quite ridiculous.
He's a quack, same as the rest.
A little self reflection may serve the members of the ANL etc. well in showing them the roots of fascism, denial of rights etc. (again).
After all, a man's entitled to his own opinion at the very least, and that depends a lot on how it was formed, and that's the disturbing part.

author by ------publication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 00:44author address author phone

To be honest, I feel the decision by UCD tpwithdraw Irving's invitation to speak is a futile victory. The left, with their threats and potenetial criminal activity have not stopped Irivng airing his views. He has managed to gain 15 minites on the national broadcasting service of Ireland. He made mince meat of a UCD historian (not necessairly factually). The UCC philosoph were given a chance to have their say. Where were the ANL or AFA ? Neither were given airtime, and will never be given airtime. The only publicity they got was an indirect reference by UCC to their purported potential violent activity.

In fact it is almost better that the UCC debate has been cancelled. Now we will all be able to highlight that letting him speak through a public media has had no effect. Thus it creates a stronger argument to allow the likes of Irivng speaking without the fear of a mass uprising

author by Viewerpublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 01:20author address author phone

I guess all that PR went deeper into me than I thought and came out subliminally!!

sort of on topic, I thought this was quite a powerful film. well worth seeing.

author by Fanta Guypublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 01:57author address author phone

Irving was very reasonable and reasoned on the Pat Kenny Show. The Israeli guy from UCD was slick but had no answer for anything Irving said. So why must Irving be silenced? I think we got the answer tonight. Irving showed he is not denying the mass murder of Jews. He only denies the 'Holocaust Industry' he said started in the 1970's. This is in line with what Norman G. Finkelstein says. Hence the need to smear and silence him. The Holocaust Industry is the sacred cow of Israel and their toadies. It is a cash cow and a justification for anything Israel does.

It is the people who want to silence Irving who are a danger to this country. They are the new Stormtroopers. The UCC guy told how there had been threats by violent people against Irving and the Committe if Irving was allowed talk about free speech, not the 'Holocaust', in UCC. I hope the thugs who are using the threat of violence to censur what the rest of us can hear are charged and exposed as the bigots and fascists they are.

From what I saw and heard tonight, thanks to RTE, it is not Irving that is a Nazi or a Nazi sympatiser but those who oppose him under such banners as 'Anti Nazi' .

This story starts off with a smear, 'Nazi Irving' and then seeks to silence his defence. What thuggery!

author by Quispublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 02:07author address author phone

Street actionists want to protect the People from fascist poisoning. Quis custodiet ipsos costodes? Who shall protect the People from their pugilistic protectors?

author by Fionnpublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 09:21author address author phone

The fact is the Holocaust happened - looking around Easons or Waterstones or my local library the shelves are bulging with books on the crimes of the Nazis and the History Channel (The Hitler Channel more like) replays wall to wall documentaries about Hitler, Goering, Himmler, Heydrich and the Waffen SS.
Historical journals online are crammed with academic studies of the Nazi era.
Wikipedia is a treasure trove for the lazy undemanding reader.

When I mentioned Irving to a group of friends who are not news junkies or bibliophiles like myself they replied "Irving who?"

Irving is a joke - he is clearly a narcisstic nut who has indentified a market in Holocaust denail - there is a niche market for the UFO, JFK assassination, crop circles, marxism, christianity and other superstition so why not holocaust denial.

Irving is not going to change the facts no matter how often he speaks.

So why all the noise and panic?

Let the fool speak and hang himself with his own words.

author by Caobhinpublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 11:54author address author phone

RTE had no problem denying free speech to republicans during the armed struggle and I doubt many of the morons so concerned about protecting this nazi filths "right" to free speech are as outraged when censorship is directed towards progressive/revolutionary/leftwing groups.

author by paul o toolepublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 13:14author email pauljotoole at eircom dot netauthor address author phone

Irving sells more books and gains national attention, RTE gets the ratings, the papers have something insignificant to write about to-morrow and the politicians walk free from any scrutiny for their week of shameful existence, thanks to our national broadcaster.
Irving turned out not to be the Nazi supporter he was accused of being, If he is, Kenny or the other two never even accused him of this let alone proved it. He did not 'deny' the attrocity that was the Nazi regime and its criminals. He did not deny a whole lot except the use of the word 'Holocaust'. He asserts that there is no proof Hitler orchastrated the extermination of the Jewish population, this of course dosent mean that Hitler didnt orchestrate this attrocity. If we are to understand the true extent of Nazism ,surely we should take all the facts into account, and place it all in context. Personally I do not agree with his assertion.

W.W,II left us with the Nuremburg Principles which was created to prevent the likes of Hitler succeeding ever again.....'citizens have the 'DUTY' to act and circumvent national laws when they see war crimes and crimes against humanity being comitted....'
If you consider the fact that more than 5,000,000 innocent Iraqis have been killed by US/UK since 1991 and this is being denied by our govt and all western governments, can we also accuse Irving of selective reasoning....NO.
If Irving is to be reviled for his views, they should be scrutinised in the light of the present, as well as the past.
There is no better way to honour the mainly Jewish Holocaust victims of Hitlers Nazi Germany and the other 44 million deaths due to Hitlers misadventures, than to realise how little we have learned or are willing do to prevent it happening again-little and nothing.

One of Hitlers most revealing, deliberately un-reported quotes.....'It would all have been worth it for the saving prize of the Caspian Sea...'.
What do you think the wars in Iraq, Iran, Afghinastan, Chechnya is all about, democracy? No, the Caspian and 'Corridor-8'.
Now this would have been a debate worth having on RTE with RBB and Irving if it exposed Aherne, Harney,O rourke, O'Dea, McDoughall as criminals in mis-informing the Irish people and allowing Shannon to be used as a Warport which to Iraqis and Afghani's is the new gates to the new Auschwitz .

author by Rot Front!publication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 14:38author address author phone

Here's a short article from the Examiner on last night's protest that included activists from the SWP, WSM, SF, Organise!, ISN, Residents Against Racism and Anti-Fascist Action. The report cites a figure of 20 protestors though this number increased as the evening went on. A large Garda presence, assisted by the Special Branch and RTE security, prevented protestors from entering the building and speaking to audience members.

author by Bazooka Joepublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 15:22author address author phone

Irving made it clear that he does not question the historical fact of the mass murder of mostly Jewish people under the Nazis. He said he would be a fool to do so. As an historian he bases his evidence only on available documents. 60 years after the fact, almost all such papers concerning Nazi orders for the killing of Jews have surfaced. None of these papers show a direct order from Hitler to 'exterminate' Jews. Irving argues the mass murder of Jews was somthing carried out by the SS and Gestapo. Again, he is arguing on the presently available evidence alone. This is what many historian say: Hitlers minions did what they though he would want and not what he directly ordered.

This is what angers Zionists: they claim 'THE HOLOCAUST' is a periodic surfacing of the innate hatred 'gentiles' have for Jews. Jews are particularly and specifically in danger of being exterminated by non-Jews. For this reason Jews must have a homeland (Israel) where they can be safe. The Zionists claim THE HOLOCAUST is unique. It is not to be compared with all the other genocidal mass murders in history. It is uniquely based on the worlds innate hatred of Jews. Hence, Israel must exist, for Jews to be free.

As Irving and Finkelstien point out, THE HOLOCAUST INDUSTRY only started in the 1970's for two reasons. One, to justify Israel and any abuses of Palestinian people it carries out and two, to extort billions for those selling the scam.

One needs to examine the differences between the concepts of the Nazi Holocaust and THE HOLOCAUST, as questioned by many, including Irving.

The Palestinian people are also the victims of the Nazi Holocaust as they were displaced, imprisoned and murdered due to what the Nazis did to Jews and the resultant establishment of Israel. The Nazi Holocaust created Israel but THE HOLOCAUST is the justification for Israel to act in ways no ordinary state can because it is preserving the Jewish people from the inevitable and recurring attempt of Gentiles to exterminate Jews. Who wouldn't deny this?

author by so called leftistspublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 15:34author address author phone

I wanted to hear Irving speak on Monday, mainly because of all the controversy, but I also wanted to make my own decision. I am interested in revisionists after reading Norman Finkelstein's book 'The Holocaust industry' in which he details how the holocaust is and has been grossly over-used as a political weapon and money making fraud. It is a very sensitive issue and takes real bravery to talk about without being stripped of all credibility, yet it is essential that it is discussed.

The ignorant mob-like so called 'anti-fascists' have now made this impossible. Who do they think they are?? When did they become the moral guardians of the nation? Nothing more than a bunch of deluded, student (probably middle class) fools who probably could not recognise real fascism if they had their heads up Mussolini's arse.

They probably think that they have won a battle for civilisation against the 'fascist enemy' but all they have done is once again stifle adult debate. Morons.

author by WikiWookiepublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 15:37author address author phone

Wikipedia definition

Holocaust denial is the claim that the genocide of Jews during World War II—usually referred to as the holocaust did not occur in the manner and to the extent described by current scholarship.

Key elements of this claim are the rejection of any of the following: that the Nazi government had a policy of deliberately targeting Jews and people of Jewish ancestry for extermination as a people; that between five and seven million Jews were systematically killed by the Nazis and their allies; and that genocide was carried out at extermination camps using tools of mass murder, such as gas chambers.

author by Spot the Dogpublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 15:51author address author phone

Bazooka Joe,

You should be careful there when you lump in Irving within Finkelstein under the sub-heading Holocaust Industry. Finkelstein in no way denies any facets of the modern historical analysis of the events of the holocaust. He criticises the manner in which these events are cheapened by political and compensatory abuse of the terminology in order to gain money or to stifle debate. This is not to be in anyway confused with Irving who disputed the events of the holocaust as presented in all mainstream modern analysis.

author by Fionnpublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 16:53author address author phone

Irving is a joke and if he wants to continue making an idiot of himself he is more than welcome.

National socialists are beneath contempt but left wing socialists are like the pot calling the kettle black.

If the socialists who are protesting against Irving came to power in Ireland they would outlaw all other parties, they would nationalise all property whether it is a factory owned by a rich fat cat or a little girl's piggy bank, they would use the military and the police to enforce their will and persecute, jail or execute any opposition.

You would see musicians like myself forced to hand over the money they earn busking on Grafton St to the state.

I don't want to wear a brown, black or green Nazi uniform.

I certainly don't want to wear a red uniform either.

author by Jeremypublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 17:17author address author phone

The hypocrisy of the Left never ceases to amaze me. Why deny free speech to so-called fascists?

What about Communists? The nerve of the Workers party whinging about the Holocaust, when their great benefactors the Communist Party of the Soviet Union perpetrated some of the worst atrocities and mass murder in history. With 20-40 million dead? Millions sent to Soviets Gulags, mass-relocations of entire ethnic groups (e.g. Chechens and others, Baltic Germans etc.)

Trotsky's Red Army committed many atrocities against the so-called 'Whites' in the Russian Civil War and his treatment of the Poles was tantamount to genocide.

The Anarchists, who committed atrocities in the Spanish Civil War?

What about the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia? Almost a quarter of the population was annihilated (including historical ethnic minorites such as the Chams) mostly for being educated and (relatively) middle class.

Angola under the MPLA?

Ethiopia under the Dengue?

For the life of me, I can't understand how so-called far right groups and people identified as such are persecuted in this way and yet political parties and individuals purportedly Socialist or Communist are allowed to organise with impunity here? Can anyone explain this to me?


author by Jeremypublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 17:22author address author phone

Iriving didn't deny millions of Jews were killed during WW2. In fact, he cited the true figure was about 3 million (if you listened to him). He's probably wrong, of course.

Also, he didn't in any way praise the Third Reich.

The logic of the laughable 'no platform' policy is that it is to prevent 'recruitment' to fascist parties. Which far right party is Iriving a recruiter for? Evidence?

I found that his opponent couldn't directly contradict any direct claim he made. Did you all notice that too?

Here's another salient point: what defines a "fascist"?

author by exhaustedpublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 17:25author address author phone

The joke before now only spoke to the media who studied his appearance at the Oxford Union in late 2007 & watched him speak to a far right rally called to overthrow the democratic state in Hungary.

The joke has been given more favourable publicity in Ireland in the last two weeks than he got in the last ten years.

The joke shook Pat Kenny's hand & sipped on Ballygowan water & then a night's work done went & stayed in a four star hotel paid for with an Irish credit card accompanied by three handlers.


Only once before has an Irish or Irish American television flagship chatshow entertained Holocaust deniers. Phil Donahue did David Dukes in 1992.

You may watch that program in its entirey & compare treatment of the material & individual with last night's Late Late show .
part 1 -
part 2 -

Dukes accompanied Irving to the Holocaust conference in Iran, & their onslaught on European public opinion is co-ordinated. The aim is clear - identify the Holocaust solely as a Jewish issue & more importantly only as a political tool of the Israeli state. That makes a mockery of what the Holocaust was about - the systematic removal of civil & human rights for millions of Europeans categorised first as Communists, then as Trade Unionists, then as Jews, then as Genetically undesirable (handicapped in either mental or physical sense) then as Slavs, then as Gypsies and finally at the end of the horrible list - masons & jehovah witnesses.

Yep Irving & Dukes are jokes. Yep they vary their script depending on who they are talking to. Yes - Irish support passive or active or more valuably indifference, are crucial to the global resurgence of neoNazi-ism and white supremacism. They long ago co-opted the celtic cross & included gaelic and celtic symbology in their pantheon of supposed racial difference. If the Irish publically rejected the use of such symbols & officially repudiated their use - then they would have to go on using those semiotics which are illegal in 13 of the EU states & we would see the wolf for what it is.

Yep. Big big joke. But I'm not laughing. I don't need to awake from a bad trip & see the gifted young man who first invited Irving to Ireland play sophist games & pervert his intelligence which had won him a scholarship (like me) not on the back of work but on the shoulders of parental income to know that the then (the first time Irving was invited to Ireland) & now (Irving's feted appearance which makes a mockery of European partner's barring orders) - Ireland has changed. Utterly changed. The American liberal model where celebrity status & wealth are worth more than scruples has won & taken all. This generation's young man of UCC, might not be a scholar like the first to invite him - but he is assured a long & lucrative career, with social cache - away from the unpleasantness of marginalisation, social welfare, a career with powerful friends made in the highest of places modern Irish society can offer - the media.

But as soon as you have powerful friends
: you are assured powerful enemies.

Pat Kenny's gravestone will get its swastika. The battle moves on.

author by Tonyopublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 18:05author address author phone

Well done to the protesters! I wish I knew about this shameful event before it happened, I would definitely go to the RTE. No tribune for fascists! ¡No Pasarán!

author by Dave Catleughpublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 19:50author email dave at pentagramz dot comauthor address author phone

"David Irving has rightly been convicted in the British and Austrian courts for his views on the holocaust"

This is incorrect. David Irving has never been convicted of a crime in a British Court.

author by Mepublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 21:22author address author phone

Was it not the 'success' of the SWP (and others) in preventing Irving from speaking in public that lead to the decision by RTE to have him on the Late-Late Show?

Had not the SWP (and others) been so determined to prevent Irving from speaking in public, and had they just ignored him, or decided to announce a decision to stage a totally peaceful protest outside the UCC Philosophical Society event, then would it not be fair to say that Irving would never have been offered a platform on the Late Late?

If 'No Platform' (handily 'chantable' and therefore usually devoid of meaning) . . .

(See: for more on chantable meaninglessness :-)

is such a wonderful useful mantra how did it lead to 'Big Platform' in this case?

'Small Platform' would have been far preferable than 'Big Platform' , would it not?

I think the SWP (and others) might benefit from a rethink of their overall strategy, especially in light of the outcome in this particular instance.

Blaming RTE unfortunately won't cut much mustard with anyone that didn't wholeheartedly join in with the SWP (and others) total strategy failure. Failure to foresee the possibility that RTE might offer him a rather GIANT platform (in relative terms) after the 'success' of the threatened Cork 'action' is an indictment of the short-sightedness of the ones that credit themselves with the success of the Cork 'action'.

Preventing Irving from speaking at a very small event was a giant 'come on' to some broadcasting org to give him a bigger platform. I realise hindsight is 20-20, but still - many people offered the advice, in other related threads, to just ignore Irving and not give him the publicity he seeks. Maybe certain people should have been more open to listening to that advice, and the resultant RTE debacle may have been avoided. Just my 2 cents.

The SWP (and others) appear to have won a very small, and in retrospect, quite insignificant battle but lost a much more important war. Well done the SWP (and others) . . . . (/sarc)

author by FACTS NOT FICTIONpublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 22:32author address author phone

EXhausted you do yourself no favours by proving your ignorance of facts.

You state that David Duke accompanied David Irving to the Holocaust Confrence in Tehran mmmm that will come as a surprise to the Prison Authorities in Vienna.

Irving was sitting in solitary confinement in Prison, in Austria during the conference.

So please exhausted before you go on another rant CHECK YOUR FACTS !!!!

author by suinpublication date Sat Mar 08, 2008 22:38author address author phone

Irving has criminal convictions, but not in the UK or Australia.

However, he had an even bigger misfortune before the high court in London where he lost a celebrated defamation case and whatever reputation he had as a historian.

having watched the Late Late, I wonder what all the fuss was about. Anyone who witnessed the fat fascist fraud in action will realize that freedom is better served by allowing his unattractive views and personality every possible bit of exposure. Those who would censor the fat fraud only create a mystique about this pedestrian has-been.

author by tomeilepublication date Sun Mar 09, 2008 12:42author address author phone

I just did a word count for the rte news website. RTE , the state broadcaster published 309 words of 'new-news' for today along with old news stories left up from Friday and Saturday and even older "features" or "craic " stories taken from other websites and newspapers.
It makes no sense that RTE can manage to find a million euros a year for Pat Kenny ,when , with that amount of money , they could employ twenty extra journalists at fifty thouand a year each.

author by disgracedministerpublication date Mon Mar 10, 2008 00:22author address author phone

I'm confused by the relating of various incidents of mass killing and the accusations of which is worth more or less. I think the reactionary element of the political left was right to protest as it is how they feel they should voice their feelings about the situation. This is a perfectly valid reaction and is in no way hypocritical towards the view of censorship. They voice their opinions outside the building where as Mr. Irving gets to speak to nation on television. Funny...

My feelings about the the situation stem from a few small points/rants.

1. Does RTE have any sort of format for debate anymore or is it little more than a publicity attaining device.

2. It's unfair to blame Kenny for the majority of dreadful broadcasting that comes from The Late Late Show. Take a look at the lazy researchers. Go along to a viewing of something like "Questions and Answers" and you'll see how poorly produced RTE programs can be, but I apologise for mentioning this as it's probably a well known fact.

3. I believe in allowing Irving to voice his opinions but I would much rather he do them in the context of a debate in which he can be effectively counter-pointed and shown for the dreadful academic he claims to be. Given a free reign with poor opposition it's likely that people who know just the bare minimum about the Holocaust could be convinced otherwise.

4. Going back to the referencing of other atrocities, there are plenty of books and articles on other atrocities and they are there to be read and referenced. Nobody ignores the Russian sacrifice, not least the Russians themselves, and the Chinese certainly don't let Japan forget about their sufferings, and recently some Khmer Rouge suspects have been successfully put on trial.

Ten people killed in bombing raid is enough to turn my stomach, let alone millions dying by various horrible means in death camps. I find the Nazi situation horrifying simply on the scale and resources applied to the task. Also they kept extensive documentation to show how many they killed. Maybe it would be interesting to ask the researcher in RTE what he thought was interesting about Irving's work and how applicable it was to the show in question.

I'm in Tokyo at the moment so i didn't get to see it but i'm guessing he had a new book coming out. Lazy....

author by Billy No-Matespublication date Mon Mar 10, 2008 11:58author address author phone

Two points on the above;
Kenny was awful because he concentrated on arguing with Irving on Irving's territory; his books and his archives, which he by definition knows better than Kenny. Irving spoke to rallies of the NPD in Germany in the early 1990s, greeted by boneheads seig-heiling, and at indoor meetings with the German Nazi right, all of which was filmed and appeared on documentaries at the time. In London in 1992 his public appearences were stewarded by C-18, then in their early stages. This also featured on TV. At these he made the type of remarks re Jews and the Holocaust that he does not do on primetime TV. So he could have been challenged, had RTE actually given a fuck.
Secondly; there seems to be a few 'sneaking regarders' slithering on here to downplay Irving's revisionism and compare him to Finkelstein etc. Note; the UCD historian was not an 'Israeli' as far as I know. Some Zionists do argue that there was no other suffering like that of the Jews under the Nazis but that shouldn't mean people then react by going what about the Russians etc? The Nazi plan to exterminate European Jewry was unique and in terms of their war effort made no sense. Killing as many Russian soldiers as possible does make miltary sense; working prisoners to death also makes sense but concentrating huge resources on the rounding up and killing of Jews did not; hence it was an ideologicaly driven genocide. And just because the Isrealis are bastards to Palestinians does not mean it should be downplayed.

author by Invectorpublication date Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:38author address author phone

This morning's IT asks a question Was it right for RTE to invite Irving onto the Late Late? See if some of you can transfer your discussion to the site -

author by Victorpublication date Mon Mar 10, 2008 13:09author address author phone

'Some Zionists do argue that there was no other suffering like that of the Jews under the Nazis but that shouldn't mean people then react by going what about the Russians etc? The Nazi plan to exterminate European Jewry was unique and in terms of their war effort made no sense. Killing as many Russian soldiers as possible does make miltary sense; working prisoners to death also makes sense but concentrating huge resources on the rounding up and killing of Jews did not; hence it was an ideologicaly driven genocide. And just because the Isrealis are bastards to Palestinians does not mean it should be downplayed.'

The Nazi holocaust was 'unique', was it? 'Ideologically driven', eh?

What about the Soviet Union's ideological campaign to punish successful peasant-farmers ("kulaks" and "NEP-men") in the 1930s ("class enemies") for no other fact than they had acquired a slight improvement in their standard of living under (Lenin's) New Economic Policy (NEP)? The forced collectivation and deportations to Siberian Gulags of the unwilling, who fought to defend their property? More than 1.8 million peasants were deported in 1930-193. A combination of dekulakization, collectivization, and other repressive policies led to mass starvation in many parts of the Soviet Union and death of at least 14.5 million of peasants in 1930-1937.

In 1932-1933, approximately 3.1 - 7 million people, mainly in Ukraine, died from famine after Stalin forced the peasants into the collectives (this famine is known in Ukraine as Holodomor) and is considered a deliberate policy of genocide to quash nationalist and separatist sentiment in Ukraine (exposed to the West at the time of the NY Times journalist, Malcolm Muggeridge).

Time and time again the horror of Soviet Communism and other related left-wing dictatorships have been rightly exposed as objectively worse than most far-right or fascist regimes including, I would think, Nazi Germany itself. The deliberate killing of 6 million Jews is but a fraction of the tens of millions annihilated by the Soviet regime deliberately, through execution, forced labour or intentional starvation.

And yet fascism -or anyone's opinions deemed too "right-wing" by the lefties -is considered so awful that the Communist Party of Ireland, Socialist Party and others are given the right ot organise here and disseminate their party political material. Why?

author by Viewerpublication date Mon Mar 10, 2008 14:47author address author phone

Good points viktor. Fascism comes in many guises and doesn't always wear brown!! We've seen some embryonic fascist behaviour over this issue too IMHO. and it wasn't by Irving, like him or not.

"Some Zionists do argue that there was no other suffering like that of the Jews under the Nazis but that shouldn't mean people then react by going what about the Russians etc?

er..why shouldn't people attempt to find counter examples when an argument is put forth that they don't agree with??
Surely thats the essence of how people debate an issue.

as the song says: "fuck you I won't do what ya tell me"

"The Nazi plan to exterminate European Jewry was unique and in terms of their war effort made no sense."

Granted, it wasn't very logical, in so far as people making war are logical. But everyone else that died in that horrible war and the previous one and the people viktor mentioned are all equally dead. Also, Many many of them died more painful and slower deaths than those who met their end in the gas chambers. All those lives are equally important in my eyes. What happened to the jewish people was terrible but they don't have a special monopoly on suffering by virtue of their tribal membership

"Killing as many Russian soldiers as possible does make miltary sense; working prisoners to death also makes sense but concentrating huge resources on the rounding up and killing of Jews did not; hence it was an ideologicaly driven genocide. And just because the Isrealis are bastards to Palestinians does not mean it should be downplayed."

military sense - what an oxymoron!

so let me get this clear. if i kill 20 million russians painfully (freezing, starving, blowing up or shooting) who have guns and try to defend themselves, In your eyes, it is not anything like as bad as killing 6 million people of a different tribe who don't have guns.
Quality over quantity eh? A sporting chance and all that old bean, what? Is that what your judgement comes down to??

Sure, killing civilians is pretty bad but is it 3.3 times as bad. I mean none of these folks wanted to die, I'm sure many of the russian soldiers were young men with little choice but to fight.

And killing russians WAS ideologically driven. And if killing six million jews was genocide then killing 20 million russians is surely worse. Or is it ok because there were lots more where they came from? Is it the percentage of a particular tribe you kill that makes it matter?? Thats a very slippery slope!!. I shudder to think what little regard you must have for an individual chinese or indian (or american!!) life. Also BTW Hitler is known to have referred to russians as less than human and accordingly they didn't bother to take many prisoners.

You cannot make distinctions like that between people's suffering. Every human is an individual with an equal claim to life and tribal membership does not make them any more or less important. What gives you that right?? And in doing so are you not just practicing a subtler form of what the ss were doing with the jews. Implying that some life is less important than other life and acting on that notion

author by Billy No-Matespublication date Mon Mar 10, 2008 16:23author address author phone

Er, I distinctly smell something funny here...but howsever, the most serious, adademic reserach of the last decade, based on the Russian archives by Prof Shelia Fitzpatrick among others has concluded that about 2 million people died as a result of Stalinism in the 30s. Terrible, horrible and wrong; but not the 20-30 million promoted by the American right since the 1950s and siezed on by many including sneaking regarders to say 'ah, old Adolf was bad, but Stalin was worse so why can't we be fascists.'
Still didn't answer my point about Irving and his pals in Germany etc in the early 90s.
I don't believe in a heriarchy of victims but theres a difference between dying in combat; of starvation; in a prison camp through neglect; through over-work; and being gassed because you are the wrong religion.

author by Billy No-Matespublication date Mon Mar 10, 2008 16:55author address author phone

The link below discusses the debate on Stalin's crimes and the numbers killed in a rational fashion.

author by Viewerpublication date Mon Mar 10, 2008 23:12author address author phone

"I don't believe in a heriarchy of victims but theres a difference between dying in combat; of starvation; in a prison camp through neglect; through over-work; and being gassed because you are the wrong religion."

Perhaps you can quantify that difference for me? And are the people any less dead? And did one suffer more than another?
If you don't believe in a hierarchy of victims then all the unnecessary deaths and suffering are equally wrong aren't they?

I don't believe the individual russian soldiers wanted to suffer and die. They didn't start the war, so in a sense they were put there by circumstances outside their control. The germans were attacking them. They were defending themselves and their families. Many of the 20 million were innocent civilians too. And many innocent civilians died of starvation, freezing, and even had to resort to cannibalism to try to survive at the siege of stalingrad. Try to Imagine THEIR suffering.

Why should the motive of the wrong doer make a victim's suffering and death any less meaningful to you?

Does the label "russian" make you any less imporant than the label "jewish" . They are just words. A life is a life.

I have to say that if I had awful hobsons choice to prevent one or the other, the only way I could possibly proceed (apart from the obvious choice of killing myself first to avoid the job!!) would be to equate 20 million deaths with 6 million deaths. Accordingly I would have no option but to save the russians as the overall amount of unnecessary life taking and suffering is much less. (assuming each human has a roughly similar capacity for suffering, given their similar physical make up)

So why is one a "holocaust" and the other not mentioned very often?? It certainly doesn't get a flashy word of its own, huge media sales and a political lobby to die for. In fact mostly all we hear on our media is negative things about russia. The fact is they are a great and resourceful people and that needs to be said more often. We in the west have really fucked over the russian people in so many ways. So did many of their leaders too. They get it from all sides. We could at least give them a flashy word and a nice little earner too.

Yet all anyone ever seems to talk about is the suffering of the jewish people. There is something a little off about that. This lack of proportion is all caught up in fundamentalist religious belief systems, PR and profit.

Question: If I was a biased historian who wrote a book denying a few million of the deaths on the russian front, would the socialists aggressively stop me speaking, would I be jailed for my opinions, and would I get to speak to pat kenny about it on the late late in front of a million people? I doubt it very much. Such is the power of PR
(I'm sure I'd get an occasional gig with commie bashers in the US though!)

So lets try to stop being selective about whose lives matter more than others in our thoughts and in our media. You may disagree with my empirical approach but let me ask you this: If 200 brown people dying in a plane crash in india mattered as much to us as a few american soldiers (or some celebrity scratching their ass) and the media accordingly gave proportionate coverage, then would it not be a very different world??

author by donkylemorepublication date Tue Mar 11, 2008 00:52author address author phone

His point seems to be that the holocaust ( a word he avoids like it were unclean) was an outside in arrangement with Hitler acquiescing to the henchman at the front.
Whether Hitler approve of a defined final Solution is unclear, as the narative is broken by a void of documentation.
Irving's point is that after 60 years no documentary evidence has emerged.
This is irrelevant realy.
Are the British plans to bomb Dresden freely available I wonder, and did Churchill approve . Or the White House approval of the Mai Lai massacre.
It is more absurd to silence Irving than it is to give him a platform to enunciate his views.
Otherwise he cant be legitimately chalanged ; at least not adequately.
Any who writes the history?
The Victors always do '
To silence Irving is to bestow upon him the status of the oppressed.
...I may disagree with every thing you say , but I will defend with my very life your every right to say it... Voltaire
I use that one a lot . It seems to have particular relevance here.

Indymedia Ireland is a media collective. We are independent volunteer citizen journalists producing and distributing the authentic voices of the people. Indymedia Ireland is an open news project where anyone can post their own news, comment, videos or photos about Ireland or related matters.