CathNews - a Service of Church Resources

Have Your Say 

Recent Comments

1. This is a strange way to protect against the dangers of Nazi ideology.

   Posted By: Hythloday

2. It may seem strange, but if it encourages people not to trust the words of people like David Irving, then it's a great idea!

   Posted By: Paul Keen

3. And this is newsworthy of reporting here why?

   Posted By: Peter

4. One can not be an advocate of free speech and support holocaust denial as a crime. Holocaust denial, like fake moon landings, sightings of Elvis, and all such conspiracy theories, might be crazy and stupid but we should not make every crazy stupid idea a crime. These people should be reasoned out of their irrational ideas.
   It is also a stupid law that you can be fined for committing a crime you did not know you committed in the first place and was not even in that country at the time.
   

   Posted By: Voice of reason

5. Holocaust denial is about much more than a mere denial of fact. To align such denial with those of denials of moon landings etc is to miss the point entirely.
   Freedom of Speech is not a license to hate speeech or to vilification. There are many examples of the limits upon such a freedom. And this is necessary as human freedom is always about limit.

   Posted By: Mark

6. Mark: Fining people for Holocaust denial or for any other opinion, erraneous or not, regarding history or politics, is a Soviet concept pure and simple! This is the prototype of tyranical, communist denial of any free speech that is remotely political; much like the "hate crimes" "law" sneakily passed in the U.S. by attaching it to a military appropriations bill. If you can't or won't see what's really going on here. You are going to be unpleasantly surprised when they arrest you for some (near) future "hate" statement.

   Posted By: John

7. The people who comment here have not listened to the interview... no one who listens to the interview can say he denied the Holocaust occurred. Now we have a Politically Correct "Event"..(didn't want to use the "H" word).

   Posted By: Farkel44

8. It's too bad he is not a Muslim.... American Universities would be bending over backwards for him to speak and gladly pay the fine.

   Posted By: Farkel44

9. John: You are talking in the luxury of ungrounded asbstraction,and in the delirium of conspiracy theory, making very odd conspiracy analogies re your vent against the hate crime legislation in the US (btw what is the problem with law against hate crime?).
   Conspiracy theory doth not a cogent argument make.
   But rather than engage in conspiracy and abstraction consider that for Germany Holocaust denial has a very particular resonance. This is not international law, it is a law particular to Germany and its experience and the added meaning that such denial has.If you are a Holocaust denier, John, then do not venture into Germany. You are free to express your idea of freedom elsewhere.
   Holocaust denial is never uttered in a vacuum. It has very clear intent and Williamson and other such deniers (as few as they are) know this very well.
   On the other hand, Holocaust suffering should not be used to legitimate further suffering or immunity from challenge (as is too often the case). But that's another discussion altogether.

   Posted By: Mark

10. This Bishop has a big problem. As a Catholic, I am sickened and ashamed of him. May God have mercy on him and give him a new heart. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence knows about the horrible Holocaust. It's even shown on T.V. so how any person can deny it is beyond me. If anyone Jewish reads this, please know that most all of us believe that you are the chosen people by God, and that's probably why evil hates you so. Shalom Arlene

    Posted By: arlene boden

11. Farkel44,
    I don't know whether you are playing with semantics or just playing with the truth, but while it is true that Williamson does not deny the Holocaust per se (and nor affirm it either) he denies that any Jewish person was killed in a gas chamber, and affirms that there was no systematic solution concocted and put into action by Hitler in regards to Jewish people. Just check any recent video on Youtube so to verify this.
    I do hope that you aren't being a literalist.

    Posted By: Mark

12. Neither Churchill, Eisenhower, De Galle ever mention "gas chambers", Nor does Elie Weisel in his book "Night".
    

    Posted By: JAMES PHILLIPS

13. Please note, Arlene Boden, that the hate crimes have been implemented by the Jewish Left ADL and not by Jews in general.The target includes Catholics, the people of God, those who believe in the New Covenant of Jesus which is the fullfillment of the Abrahamic covenent.They are the Chosen People.
    The Jewish Left, which is pro abortion,sodomy, halloween and other evils,has an agenda of its own.And Anti Semitism(racism) is a weapon for legalising their manifesto.
    Bishop Williamson has said that he does not hate Jews and once even invited a Rabbi to speak at his seminary. As a Catholic he has to love Jews. He was opposed to the enemies of the Church he said and was referring to the attempts at world domination by the Jewish Left.He has not denied that millions of people were killed in the Holocaust but questions the figure.There are historians who claim that sickness and malnutrition were major causes of death.

    Posted By: Lionel Andrades

14. Let's level the playing field. How about:
    Fine the ones who twist and outright lie about the numbers in the Inquisition, The Crusades (and tell who were were defending against) -- and fine the ones who say Galileo was tortured, or that Copernican theory had no support in the Church. Let's start fining the Pius XII deniers that accuse him and call him "Hitler's Pope". What's next? Fined for denying atheism, socialism, communism?

    Posted By: Paul Swonger

15. The problem with Holocaust denial is that it is not a true denial. most “deniers” do not deny the olocaust occurred; they argue about the number of Jews killed - 300,000, 3 million, 5 million, 6 million etc. To make that a crime is ridiculous.

    Posted By: Voice of reason

16. Bishop Richard Williamson received his letter on 26/10/09 informing him that he had been fined by a German court for “incitement” over his claim on Swedish television that fewer than 300,000 Jews died in Nazi death camps.
    In January 2009, shortly after Pope Benedict XVI repealed an order made by the previous pope excommunicating Bishop Williamson and the other bishops of the Order of Saint Pius X over their rejection of the Second Vatican Council, the world media suddenly “remembered” Bishop Williamson’s statements about the Holocaust.
    What a coincidence.
    And the day that Bishop Williamson was fined happened to be precisely the day that the Vatican was opening talks with the Society of St Pius X over the doctrinal matters separating them.
    Another concidence?
    A man from Mars might wonder whether these coincidences and media frenzies are basically attacks on the Pope himself for his willingness to reintroduce some of the traditional Catholic practices dropped during the reigns of his recent predecessors.
    

    Posted By: arnold jago

17. @Voice of reason,
    Some deniers do deny the actual Holocaust. You need to do your homework.
    But as to your odd "true denial" point: playing semantics is indicative of the same behaviour.
    Williamson hasn't denied the Holocaust, but he is on record as stating that no jewish person died in a gas chamber, denying too that Hitler conceived and put into operation a solution in regards to the jews. There is much more too, quite shocking and very sinister.Either access Google, or Youtube to see the actual interviews. It is very clear.
    That the new neo-conservative catholicism defends such behaviour yet persecutes so many others is deeply scandalous.
    It is concerning (to say the very least) that there are individuals prepared to defend Williamson by appealing to loosely understood notions of "freedom".

    Posted By: Mark

18. Just a few points: Williamson's comments from the 2008 interview (the one at question here) are clear and indicate both Holocaust denial and negationism:
    "I believe there were no gas chambers.... I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps but none of them by gas chambers," Williamson said in an interview on the Uppdrag Granskning programme.
    http://www.thelocal.se/22250/20090923/
    Williamson is clearly denying the use of gas chambers to kill Jews (and others) - this is particularly egregious considering that it was the primary method of killing.
    Similarly, Williamson is denying that millions died and suggests only 200-300K.
    If you take into account only the evidence available for Poland ALONE (ignoring the rest of Europe) eg. and not limited to, the Kerrherr report, Hofle Telegram, liquidation of the Warsaw Ghetto etc etc you can clearly see that Williamson's assertion is completely wrong by orders of magnitude.
    Additionally, no major and peer reviewed/recognised and acceptable historian asserts that the majority of the victims died from disease or malnutrition or supports either of Williamson's claims.
    I would also suggest that it was no conspiracy to attack the Pope over his talks with the SSPX which led to the highlighting of Williamson's repugnant and foolish views. Rather it was a natural consequence - before the talks the SSPX were a fringe group with no impact on the Church. People were concerned about their views but basically ignored them as irrelevant.
    The talks were/are aiming to regularise their position in the Church where they will then have a potential impact on the Church. Naturally, if their ranks contain anti-semites and extremists this is going to be highlighted by people naturally concerned about these extremist/hate views.
    If anyone has anything to be ashamed about it is the SSPX and their supporters who have not repudiated these extremists within their own ranks and have embarrassed the Pope who is trying to reach out to them and the broader Church with their excesses.

    Posted By: Concerned Jew

19. @ Concerned Jew: There are a lot of Society people not happy with Williamson's remarks. He is a conspiracy theorist from way back, and loves to get a reaction.
    I wonder if he truly believes half the things he says! It's obvious he doesn't know much about these things. I'll bet that he - like so many other conspiracy theorists - only read the cloak and dagger books that lack any referencing (or have false referencing), and take it for gospel.
    This is all such a pity, though. Williamson is a brilliant man when it comes to understanding Western civilisation. He is steeped in the classics and knows how to get the message of the Faith accross to Gen X and Y.
    If only he'd keep out of politics and history, until he learns to do some serious research! Literature and music are his forte.

    Posted By: SSPX Supporter

20. Just a few points: Williamson's comments from the 2008 interview (the one at question here) are clear and indicate both Holocaust denial and negationism:
    "I believe there were no gas chambers.... I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps but none of them by gas chambers," Williamson said in an interview on the Uppdrag Granskning programme.
    http://www.thelocal.se/22250/20090923/
    
    Williamson is clearly denying the use of gas chambers to kill Jews (and others) - this is particularly egregious considering that it was the primary method of killing.
    
    Similarly, Williamson is denying that millions died and suggests only 200-300K.
    
    If you take into account only the evidence available for Poland ALONE (ignoring the rest of Europe) eg. and not limited to, the Kerrherr report, Hofle Telegram, liquidation of the Warsaw Ghetto etc etc you can clearly see that Williamson's assertion is completely wrong by orders of magnitude.
    
    Additionally, no major and peer reviewed/recognised and acceptable historian asserts that the majority of the victims died from disease or malnutrition or supports either of Williamson's claims.
    
    I would also suggest that it was no conspiracy to attack the Pope over his talks with the SSPX which led to the highlighting of Williamson's repugnant and foolish views. Rather it was a natural consequence - before the talks the SSPX were a fringe group with no impact on the Church. People were concerned about their views but basically ignored them as irrelevant.
    
    The talks were/are aiming to regularise their position in the Church where they will then have a potential impact on the Church. Naturally, if their ranks contain anti-semites and extremists this is going to be highlighted by people naturally concerned about these extremist/hate views.
    
    If anyone has anything to be ashamed about it is the SSPX and their supporters who have not repudiated these extremists within their own ranks and have embarrassed the Pope who is trying to reach out to them and the broader Church with their excesses.
    
    
    
    
    
    

    Posted By: Concerned Jew

21. SSPX Supporter: All I can say is that if Williamson is a long-term conspiracy theorist with a known track record within the SSPX (I'll take your word for it) then one must question why Lefebvre consecrated him as a Bishop in the first place?
    It would indicate a serious failure of judgement on his part which needs to be explained by his supporters.
    
    
    

    Posted By: Concerned Jew

22. Mark: You are missing the point of my posts. I do not deny the Holocaust indeed I consider such people who do crazy and irritational. My debate is whither such denial should be a crime. I argue that it should not be.
    Freedom of speech is a bedrock of our society. Sure, it's not absolute; but we limit it only in the most rare of circumstances where it poses a direct threat to individuals, such as inciting or encouraging people to violence.
    These types of laws like other “hate speech” laws etc can then be used to shut down debate by groups who do not want certain subjects discussed.
    Sometimes we have to pay a price for freedom of speech and grit our teeth when the law allows speech which we do not like eg Holocaust denial, calling Pope Pius Hilter’s pope, certain exhibits in art galleries, obsenities written on the bible as happened in Scotland etc., but if we do not grin and bear it, we pay a higher price down the track as once you argue Holocaust denial should be a crime there is no end to it. It is a very slippery slope.
    

    Posted By: Voice of reason

23. This is persecution. If Bishop Richard Williamson in all good conscience truly believed what he said to be true, then where is the crime?

    Posted By: Nathan Socci

24. Nathan Socci: LOL, indeed, shout that defense to the courts at The Hague. I'm sure too that the Nuremburg trials would have all sat in stunned respect fro such a stance. I also see a great future in criminal law for you here in Australia. Have you considered the logical and moral consequences of such a ridiculous plea?

    Posted By: Mark

25. Mark LOL You mean the Nuremburg trials that were in part presided over by USSR judge Iona Nikitchenko?
    As yes, I have considered "the logical and moral consequences" of expressing doubt. It is called the search for truth. And I have considered "the logical and moral consequences" of not expressing doubt. It is called repression.

    Posted By: Nathan Socci

26. Lionel Andrades, the "sickness and malnutrition" was directly caused by the Nazis. Now whether Jewish, Polish, Russian, Gypsies etc died directly by gas chambers or by hanging, shooting or slowly by sickness and malnutrition- the fact remains that they ALL died because of the Nazis.
    So it is silly to scratch around questioning the numbers. Actually more than six million died.
    I do agree with you though about the Jewish Left. I dislike their views and agenda.

    Posted By: Michael Webb

• » Advertise in CathNews

Email to Friend Please fill out the following details (fields marked with a * are mandatory):
Send To Email Address*:
Send To Name *:
Sent By Email Address*:
Sent By Name *:
Text to include in email:
Captcha validation:	please enter the code above:

^ Page Top

Comment on this article

More from this section

1. Dan Brown would like to meet Pope

   Da Vinci Code author, Dan Brown, says he would like to meet Pope Benedict but has not sought an audience in order not to embarrass the pontiff, an Italian paper says.

2. Clinton hits out against religious "anti-defamation" laws

   Saying freedom of speech and religion should be upheld equally, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has criticised laws around the world that make religious defamation a crime.

3. Rejected asylum seekers return

   Nine Afghans, who were returned home by the Howard Government with promises and compensation, have come back and were granted protection by the Rudd Government, The Australian reports.

4. New ban on US nativity display challenged

   A 63 year old tradition of a privately maintained nativity scene on a public median strip in Warren, Michigan ended following assertions that it violated the principle "of separation of church and state", but the ban is now being challenged as discriminatory.

5. Irish Church has "champions for children"

   A Church established independent body in Ireland, the National Board for Safeguarding Children, has described the progress in the Church over the past two years in implementing child protection guidelines as "remarkable".