[images and captions added by this website] Najwyzszy Czas Warsaw, Poland, May 20, 2007   Freedom of Speech but not for Irving by Pawel Tobola-Pertkiewicz "I DO NOT agree with your views, but I will defend to the end your right to express them" -- once wrote François Maria Arouet, better known as Voltaire. Last Friday [May 18, 2007] during the International Book Faith in the Palace of Culture and Science, David Irving, the famous author of the book, "Hitler's War," was to meet with his readers, according to the agreement with the organizers of the Fair. This did not happen because he was forced to leave the Fair earlier than agreed. "There is no freedom of speech in Poland," Irving said while leaving the Fair, and it is very difficult to consider him wrong. COMMENTARY: by Tomasz Sommer Dear Readers -- DAVID Irving has bad luck. For, as Jan Marek Chodakiewicz rightly observed -- he chose a bad Socialist. If he had burned with love for Lenin, or even better, Trotzki, he would take on the aura of a famous writer and professor, and would be invited to Poland by the "Dziennik."   On the other hand, perhaps because of the famous British eccentricity, or because of the fact that love is blind at times, he was fixed on the brown Socialist, that is Hitler. And this was the beginning of his troubles. That opened to ostracisim, arrest, even imprisonment.    And in our country, last week, the historian was ejected from the book fair in the Palace of Culture. What is so idiotic about that is that his books can be found here at every booksellers, and even I never heard that the specialists from the "Otwarta Rzczeczpostolita" [Open Republic] took up the matter. THE case of Irving is really interesting for us mainly from the viewpoint that it is a litmus test of freedom of speech and political correctness. Thanks to that case, it is easy to indicate that the more freedom of speech is limited, the more political correctness grows in strength. It is only too bad that at the bottom all of this is a factional fight within the Socialist camp.    Hence one ought not wonder that, as I also found in Prof. Chodakiewicz, that some theses of Irving recall the thought of Jan Tomasz Gross. Irving, like Gross, notes, for example, that in the Holocaust "neighbors" played a large role. Only the Britisher argues this way in order to whitewash the Germans, and our countryman does so to redden the image of the Poles. Either way in this question they could cite each other.    If it is necessary to defend Irving, it is not on account of his fanatical love for the Führer, but only because his freedom to express his views has been curtailed. Obviously it would be best if readers would not so easily buy into the various hagiographical works of the Red murderers. The removal of Irving was provoked by Piotr Cywinski, Director of the Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum. He informed the police and the organizer that during the Fair, Article 55 of the IPN might be affected; the article runs: "Whoever publicly and against the facts denies the crimes of which Art. 1, Point 1 speaks, is subject to fine or imprisonment for up to three years." Article 1 specifies these crimes -- they are Communist or Nazi crimes. Cywinski's vigilance, however, is quite selective since about a month before, in this same Palace of Culture, 12 floors above, a certain Slawoj Zizek presented and defended Communism; Zizek is a declared Marxist, citing and praising Lenin in his publications. His presentation did not provoke any reaction on the part of Cywinski. What is more, the presentation of the Marxist was published in the "Dziennik"! Irving, who in December of last year [2006] was given an early release from prison in Austria, where he was given a three year prison sentence for "Holocaust denial," came to Poland on the invitation to the English publishing house, Focal Point, and had with him only books in the English language. In their reports, the media stated that Irving sat alone for the whole day in the smallest booth of the Fair, and hardly anyone came to him; his books were generally of little interest to anyone. If this was the case, why such an outburst about his presence at the Fair? On the other hand, from several people who had enjoyed their visit at Irving's booth, I know for a fact contrary to the media reports, during the period the Englishman sold several dozen books. The behavior of the organizers of the Fair toward the British historian or -- as the media describe him: "Holocaust revisionist," is typical of the hysteria of the media with which we already had to deal a number of times. Not one of the organizers could have known about what Irving writes in his books, since -- as the Director of the Fair, Dorota Koman, confirmed in a conversation with me -- "up until Friday we did not know that it was a question of that Irving. But fortunately he is no longer a guest of the Fair." If the organizers did not know who David Irving is, all the more so could none of the organizers know what is contained in the books of the British historian. It took only one phone call and Irving was not allowed even to explain. At once, conversation was cut off, money returned and he was asked to leave. In this way it is possible in principle to recall every publication at the Fair, for one cannot know who might propagate different types of lies and where.   ONE might agree or not with various historical theses and principles, but to forbid their publication in the name of some sort of universally binding and established historical truth is a very dangerous procedure. For we are dealing with a clear breach of the principle of freedom of speech as well as freedom of scientific publication. This undermines the very nature of historical research, and the authority of the truth for which one strives in such research. Further, we still await not only a common handbook of history for all residents of Europe, but likewise a single, well established and verified historical vision, the denial of which can be forbidden and threatened with severe consequences. This would mean neither more nor less than the total collapse of history as a scholarly study, for so long as one cannot err, then why carry on research at all. Piotr Gontarczyk, IPN historian, states that "history is for everyone -- even for those who err and for those who research. Even for those who 'deny Communist and Nazi crimes' as well as for those who intensely support the view that the earth is a flat disk, supported by four crocodiles. These do not constitute a serious threat to learning and the universal faith in the power of human reason as opposed to those who wish to put them in prison for their views." Perhaps they wish to shut Irving's mouth, since his theses are quite politically incorrect and dangerous for those who do not desire freedom of research into the history of the second World War, because its events are already officially confirmed? The famous Polish historian, Prof. Pawel Wieczorkiewicz, in the last "Templum Novum" said of Irving: "He is the best and most excellent scholar of the second World War. A researcher, whose norms are sources and not the viewpoints of historiography, the opinion of colleagues or media clips. He is a man, who because of his truly great merit -- the collecting or discovering and making accessible key documents of the Third Reich -- deserves to have his shoes cleaned with one's hat. A historian of this measure has the right to write and tell everything . . ." Where are the defenders of human rights, where is Aleksander Kwasniewski and Lech Walesa and their human rights movement when freedom or speech is threatened, and freedom of expression is throttled? Can one find a few dozen famous figures who would publicly protest against the unimaginable, but actual threats to chain the lips of persons who think otherwise? I dare to doubt it. The "Gazeta Wyborcza" now has a shoo-in candidate for next year's title of the man of the year in the person of Piotr Cywinski. The opening citation of Voltaire is an illustration of the traditional understanding of freedom of speech. In Poland this understanding clearly emerges with the slogan: "There is no freedom for the enemies of freedom." The Warsaw incident of David Irving is its sad confirmation.   Mr Irving's March 2007 visit to Auschwitz and Birkenau, Poland. Auschwitz Museum commandant Piotr M. A. Cywinski admits he notified Polish police about "an intended violation" by Mr Irving of a Polish law on free speech [note incidentally the three fake watch towers in the photo image at the foot of the Auschwitz press release] When Auschwitz banned BBC filming a TV documentary with Mr Irving David Irving to sue Warsaw Book Fair company for breach of contract Recent David Irving activities in Poland on film: Himmler's secret headquarters | Remains of Hitler's HQ The Wolf's Lair | Visit to Auschwitz and Birkenau sites | Private discussion in Warsaw

Register your name and address to go on the Mailing List to receive or to hear when and where he will next speak near you