why they give that english historian 3 years in jail?
146345
Because he broke Austrian law and the sentence the judge decided to give him was three years behind bars. Austria is a democracy / republic and the law that David Irving (how ironic that the "historian's" name is Hebrew!) violated and was sentenced under was legislated by the Austrian voters' elected representatives.\n\nAlthough that specific Austrian law would unlikely pass the United States' constitutional muster, apparently it DID meet Austria's constitutional test.\n\nLaws, in ANY country, aren't necessarily always fair nor are they always reasonable. Fair and reasonable are not constitutional requirements for any piece of legislation. \n\nAlthough we in the United States tout our constitutional right to "Freedom of Speech," there are many laws against free speech that one can be sent to jail for.\n\nLaws against "hate crimes" and some equal opportunity and affirmative action regulations, television and radio censorship violations, and some others, can cause someone to spend time in jail for a speech crime.\n\nThere was some news recently about some U.S. citizens in the Toledo, Ohio who were arrested for TALKING about killing or hurting George Bush...amongst other things. Although they hadn't acted on any of their talk, if convicted, they will be guilty of a speech crime and could serve time.\n\n"Communicating a Threat" is a speech crime in many states, too.
784637
Is he a political prisoner? If so try Amnesty International. They have phone and other contact address at the website listed below.
851281
The guy killed thousands of his own people, what else he was expecting?, I think they going to hang him in 30 days..☺
1052863
James Traficant is currently serving out an 8-year term in prison.  He was convicted of taking bribes, filing false tax returns, racketeering, and forcing his aides to perform chores at his farm in Ohio and on his houseboat in Washington, DC.\n\nConsider your sources.
941044
about 10 years in jail
208506
10 years term of jail.
562978
http://prisonactivist.org/pipermail/prisonact-list/2004-March/008873.html
97042
Go to jail for 25 years (Bernard John Ebbers) or 10 years (Andrew Fastow)
876848
twenty years in jail.
909640
He is a murderer, a madman. He killed people for sheer pleasure. He is just like any other man sentenced to death... he deserves it.
1121157
I'm sure he is a repug - those people are the most hypocrite of all.  \n\nEverything that they hate in others they commit themselves.  I think he should be jailed!!
914646
Under law the maximum penalty is two years imprisonment. Oh wouldn't it be lovely? he  could share a cell with a 24 stone armed robber whose first words to Tony would be something like "My haven't you got a pretty bottom? I think I'll call you Lillian. You're MY beatch now!". Well, after all, Blair and his cronies have been screwing us for years.\nBut it won't happen because say what you like about his freaky grasping slightly-manic pillar-box-gobbed wife she is without doubt a very clever lawyer and though it isn't likely she'll defend him personally because it's legally fraught she will have a pivotal role in his defence team. Probably it won't even get that far because who's in charge of the law? Why I do believe it's cheerful Charlie, who coincidentally employed the young Tony Blair in his chambers and was rewarded with a plum job like that. Lords should pass a motion to impeach the bloody lot but oh, hang on a tick, hasn't he got rid of the life peers and stacked it with a bunch of his mates some of whom it transpires may well have......paid.....for....the.....role.....\nGod, and people worry about the BNP subverting our democracy.
745068
He was proved innocent in a court of law.  Why would you hang and innocent person.\n\nCoach
272288
His biggest crime was to lose and get the bad tag. Had he won the 2nd World War, he would have been given a prize for World Peace. His bigest folly was to open two fronts, similar to the mistake by Napolian. History is always a record edited by the Victors and not necessarily a record of real facts.
566442
Is he guilty?  If he's still in jail from 1979 - it must have been pretty heinous.  I vote you leave him there until he's finished serving his time.
501301
It was an old English method of execution for things like treason. The offender was hanged, but cut loose before he died. Then his abdominal organs and gentials were removed (drawn) and burned in front of him. Next his heart was cut out, at which point he'd finally die. Lastly, he was beheaded and his body was cut into four segments (quartered). I think the arms and legs were simply cut off as the four pieces, and mutilated torso disposed of. So that's the general idea.
814205
A ghastly relic of the Middle Ages who is a walking advertisement for republicanism.  A man who has to have seven boiled eggs lined up for him to choose the perfect one for his breakfast, a man who has to have his cushions plumped up by someone before he can put his ar*e on them, a man who likes a servant to squeeze toothpaste on his toothbrush for him, and a man who had to have a servant hold a specimen bottle for him to pee into.  This very man married a pretty young woman who he didn't love purely for his "breeding programme", while he was sleeping with a married woman, and when his ambition in life was to be reincarnated as one of her tampons.  He is someone who likes to pretend that he is an expert on subjects such as architecture, and who actively supported the disgusting "sport" of foxhunting right up to its abolition.  He has a fondness for Islam (even has an Islamic garden), has friends in the Bin Laden family and wants to defend all faith (in defiance of the 500 year requirements of his role as the future head of the C of E), even though many Muslims would have executed him for his adultery (the fate of a princess in Saudi Arabia).  When he married his mistress he should have gone into exile, as Edward VIII did. I hope that answers your question!