David Irving: "Holocaust Denier" Denier?

The Associated Press reports on the results of David Irving's one day trial:

Right-wing British historian David Irving was sentenced to three years in prison Monday after admitting to an Austrian court that he denied the Holocaust — a crime in the country where Hitler was born.

Irving, who pleaded guilty and then insisted during his one-day trial that he now acknowledged the Nazis' World War II slaughter of 6 million Jews, had faced up to 10 years behind bars. Before the verdict, Irving conceded he had erred in contending there were no gas chambers at the Auschwitz concentration camp.

"I made a mistake when I said there were no gas chambers at Auschwitz," Irving testified, at one point expressing sorrow "for all the innocent people who died during the Second World War."

Irving, stressing he only relied on primary sources, said he came across new information in the early 1990's from top Nazi officials — including personal documents belonging to Adolf Eichmann — that led him to rethink certain previous assertions.

But despite his apparent epiphany, Irving, 67, maintained he had never questioned the Holocaust.

So according to Irving:

1. He mistakenly thought and said that there were no gas chambers in Aushwitz
2. He had found new evidence that led him to rething previous assertions
3. But no, he never questioned the Holocaust

In Denying History, a portion of the movie Mr. Death--about Fred Leuchter's claim to have proved there were no mass gassings at Aushwitz--is quoted where David Irving tells the filmmaker Errol Morris:

He [Leuchter] came back with these earth-shattering results. The big point: there is no significant residue of cynaide in the brickwork. That's what converted me. When I read that in the report in the courtroom in Toronto, I became a hard-core disbeliever. [emphasis mine] (p. 257)

So Irving never questioned the Holocaust--he just disbelieved it.

But in the background of all this, especially in the context of the Denmark cartoons, is the issue of free speech. Unlike in the US, in Europe--and Austria--there is a law against denying the Holocaust:

The court convicted Irving after his guilty plea under the 1992 law, which applies to "whoever denies, grossly plays down, approves or tries to excuse the National Socialist genocide or other National Socialist crimes against humanity in a print publication, in broadcast or other media."

... The verdict was welcomed by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, which also highlighted the issue of freedom of speech.

"While Irving's rants would not have led to legal action in the United States, it is important that we recognize and respect Austria's commitment to fighting Holocaust denial, the most odious form of hatred, as part of its historic responsibility to its Nazi past," the center's associate dean, Rabbi Abraham Cooper, said in a statement.

Denying History offers an approach to the Free Speech issue:

Walter Reich, former director of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, has noted that we must not confuse freedom of expression "with the obligation to facilitate that expression." We must never pass a law that says Holocaust deniers may not publish their own literature. But we are not obligated to publish it for them in our own publications...Being in favor of someone's right to freedom of speech is quie different from enabling that speech.

...We believe that once a claim is in the public consciousness (as Holocaust denial undeniably is), it should be properly analyzed and, if appropriate, refuted vigorously in the public arena. (p.13-14)

This is not the approach in Europe, as Irving well knows.
But does it apply to the refusal of the newspapers not to publish the 12 Denmark cartoons?

Personally, I don't think it applies at all.

Update: Powerline writes:

David Irving is an awful human being, but it's pretty hard to take the high ground with regard to freedom of speech--over, say, the Danish cartoons--when you're sending people to jail for "grossly playing down" or "trying to excuse" Nazi crimes. Some say, of course, that for Europe the Holocaust is unique and deserves this special legal status. But then, the Muslims think Mohammed is unique, too. Once you start making exceptions of this sort, it's hard to know when to stop.

Update: The headline at the Jerusalem Post reads -- "Prosecutors appeal Irving's sentence", which may seem a bit odd, since normally that would be the defense attorney's job. But the first paragraph clarifies:

Austrian prosecutors in the trial of right-wing British historian David Irving filed an appeal Tuesday to contest his three-year prison sentence, saying it was too lenient.

It's times like this I wish I knew Yiddish--I'm sure there's a phrase for an occaison like this.

Technorati Tag: David Irving and Holocaust and Holocaust Denial and Free Speech and Iran.