Comments on: Holocaust Denier Denied?

By: philip travers

philip travers — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 12:02:01 +0000

I don’t find David Irving boring,and is there some unknown rule of how not to be boring by posting something everyday!?Perhaps,he keeps his own Counsel,and, thus, boring or not,it is the beauty in the eye of the beholder. Not that I would get on that well with David Irving,because lately,and ever so often,I must for the sake of fighting other peoples’ generalities express my own.Luckily, for him, maybe,I haven’t been able to class Pom Historians as Poms.I think you are pretty disgusting,and lacking a sense of humour.Or even a tactic that suggests you have one.And I have no good reason to be called a anti-communist conservative Nazi-loving historian supporter. I just think Irving is genuine enough,whilst some who attack him ,are tittering on the brink of nappy rash.

By: l'Omnivore Sobriquet

l'Omnivore Sobriquet — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 07:58:56 +0000

Linking in this morning from France.
Calling David Irving a “Holocaust denier” is an act of mental freeze.
Your own free choice.

By: jacksonskepticalsociety

jacksonskepticalsociety — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 02:28:50 +0000

I’m not concerned in that manner. I’m just not out to have hundreds of people per day coming in and seeing a really boring post that only rehashes a couple of press releases.

Which is exactly what has happened.

By: Rodney King

Rodney King — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 23:56:59 +0000

“That said I’m less than thrilled about being linked to directly from Irving’s website.”

Why should Irving linking to your page bother you? I wouldn’t worry that it will be perceived as having been done with your go-ahead. Irving is simply a man who writes historical books that some (many) people find interesting. When he sued Deborah Lipstadt for calling him a “holocaust denier”, Lipstadt’s researchers went through Irving’s voluminous writings with a fine-toothed comb and came up with only about a dozen items where they thought they could prove him wrong. Not such a big liar it seems. I’m sure if the Soviet Union had had the Internet, Soviet citizens would have been nervous about being linked directly to Solzhenityn’s website too.

By: jacksonskepticalsociety

jacksonskepticalsociety — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 06:00:43 +0000

I wouldn’t exactly call the article sarcastic. You may not have seen some of the ones about creationists.

If “personal” is correct I am indeed interested. At the very least people will be talking about the question of how we know anything at all in history.

Maybe some of our local historians will have the wherewithal to go toe to toe (and Irving to do the same) without resorting to pointless personal attacks.

That said I’m less than thrilled about being linked to directly from Irving’s website. I mean, say what ya will about any attention being good attention, but in this case I’m not so sure.

By: personal

personal — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 02:35:38 +0000

According to Adam Lynch, who supposedly has talked to Irving, directly, Irving is planning to show up at City Hall at 6 PM on the 21st and do WJNT at 5:00 PM on the 20th and Super Talk on the 21st at 7:00 AM. At least, that seems to be in the offing at the present time.

Your analysis of the “speaking for” and then “denying connection with” is on target, from what I’ve heard, as well.

By: Donn

Donn — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 00:59:49 +0000

Regarding your superficial and biased article about David Irving: I’ve read his books and attended his lectures for years and find him an extraordinary historian, writer, researcher and lecturer. I noticed your hostile, sarcastic article about him and wondered why people who call themselves “skeptics” are invariably among the most rigidly conformist and politically correct people around.