David Irving or Oy Vey the jews go shitnuts about "holocaust denial"

[Poise n Pen]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Irving

"After Irving denied the Holocaust in two 1989 speeches given in Austria, the Austrian government issued an arrest warrant for him and barred him from entering the country."

Denying any part of the holocaust, even just arguing the numbers which I think is mainly what he did since according to some there were not even 6 million jews in all europe, is a terrible crime.

"Irving based his numbers on a falsified document "TB 47" promulgated by Nazi Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels, as well as claims made after the war by a former Dresden Nazi functionary, Hans Voigt, without verifying them against official sources available in Dresden. Irving's estimates and sources were first disputed by Walter Weidauer, Mayor of Dresden 1946–1958, in his own account of the Dresden bombing. When it was later confirmed that TB 47 was a forgery, Irving published a letter to the editor in The Times on 7 July 1966 retracting his estimates, writing that he had "no interest in promoting or perpetuating false legends". In 1977 the original version of TB 47 was finally located in Dresden by Götz Bergander."

But anything that shows German civilians being killed is a lie, even though somehow Germany's population mysteriously went from 90 million before the war to 70 million after the war.


"By November 1963, Irving was in England when he called the London Metropolitan Police with suspicions he had been the victim of a burglary by three men who had gained access to his Mayfair flat claiming to be General Post Office (GPO) engineers. Anti-fascist activist Gerry Gable was subsequently arrested and held at Hornsey police station, where on 14 January 1964, along with Manny Carpel and another, Gable admitted breaking in with intent to steal private papers. At the trial, counsel for the defence claimed that this was no ordinary crime, telling the court, "they hoped to find material they could take to Special Branch". The case was reported in the Daily Telegraph, 17 January 1964 and other newspapers."

These pseudoscientist pseudohistorians really are criminals!

Because they write poetry and stuff.

"I am a Baby Aryan
Not Jewish or Sectarian
I have no plans to marry an
Ape or Rastafarian."



Fortunately a stronk independent woman appeared to face down this horrible cis male and force him into bankruptcy. Hooray!

"Not one of [Irving's] books, speeches or articles, not one paragraph, not one sentence in any of them, can be taken on trust as an accurate representation of its historical subject. All of them are completely worthless as history, because Irving cannot be trusted anywhere, in any of them, to give a reliable account of what he is talking or writing about. ... if we mean by historian someone who is concerned to discover the truth about the past, and to give as accurate a representation of it as possible, then Irving is not a historian."

Irving, (...) had deliberately distorted and wilfully mistranslated documents, consciously used discredited testimony and falsified historical statistics. (...) Irving has fallen so far short of the standards of scholarship customary amongst historians that he does not deserve to be called a historian at all."

"Not only did Irving lose the case, but in light of the evidence presented at the trial a number of his works that had previously escaped serious scrutiny were brought to public attention. He was also liable to pay all of Penguin's costs of the trial, estimated to be as much as £2 million (US$3.2 million) though it remains uncertain how much of these liabilities he will ultimately pay for. When he did not meet these, Davenport Lyons moved to make him bankrupt on behalf of their client. He was forced into bankruptcy in 2002 and lost his home, though he has been able to travel around the world despite his financial losses"

"Irving, once highly regarded for his expert knowledge of German military archives, was a controversial figure from the start. His interpretations of the war were widely regarded as unduly favourable to the German side. At first this was seen as personal opinion, unpopular but consistent with full respectability as a historian. By 1988, however, Irving had begun to reject the status of the Holocaust as a systematic and deliberate genocide; and he soon became the main proponent of Holocaust denial. This, along with his association with far-right circles, dented his standing as a historian. A marked change in Irving's reputation can be seen in the surveys of the historiography of the Third Reich produced by Ian Kershaw. In the first edition of Kershaw's book The Nazi Dictatorship in 1985, Irving was called a "maverick" historian working outside the mainstream of the historical profession. By the time of the fourth edition of The Nazi Dictatorship in 2000, Irving was described only as a historical writer who had in the 1970s engaged in "provocations" intended to provide an "exculpation of Hitler's role in the Final Solution".Other critical responses to his work tend to follow this pattern."

Of course it could be he just held a genuine opinion developed over many years of research. nah, that's not possible.

Anyway I did not read his books and have even less inclination to read the rantings of the beast who bankrupted him, it just seems pretty ridiculous how our free speech west treats people who don't toe the line. Especially on an issue that really should not be something the west gives a crap about.