David Irving.

[TheShinje]

David Irving is a holocaust denier, although he denies this because it is a venomous title. :p

He's stirring controversy down here with his attempted entry into New Zealand, where, after his plans, was asked to speak at a national press club.

Immigration turned Irving away, and he plans to fight the system to gain legal entry into new Zealand, claiming his ban is unfair.

Irving has also been denied acess in Australia, I believe.

With all this going on I have to ask, is this ban necessary? What of his opinions and beliefs, sure they may be radical and racist, but does he not have a right to say his piece under the banner of free speech?

Don't get me wrong, I am no holocaust denier, I do believe that the holocaust was atrocious and in no way faked, and I don't care much for Irving and his uninformed oppinion, but I strongly believe that everyone should be allowed to say their piece, however misguided and wrong it may be. I think that we, as a country, have the right to hear his opinions and make an informed decision for ourselves. It's bordering on state censorship when you refuse a man access because "the state" disagrees with your view.


So, what do you OB'ers think? Would you deny Irving his freedom of speech, if he was, hypothetically, trying to gain legal access to your nation?



[i]Footnote: The falling out between Israel and New Zealand over alleged Mossad agents attempting to illegally gain New Zealand passports, along with NZ political sanctions on Israel until formal apologies have been made, are being cited as possible reasons whay irving wants to visit, even though he made plans to visit long fbefore this incident. Irving has also spoken out against the desecration of Jewish graves in a Wellington cemetery, although went on to claim that 70-80% of such cases are perpetrated by jews themselves.[/i]

[Balmon]

Long story short - and as much as I hate to say it - the ban is not constitutionally fair. Basically, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, unless his hate speeches, if they are that, are inciting violence or similar actionable offenses, he is free to speak his mind... or enter a country (I'm speaking with reference to Canada, anyway).