Letter: Free speech or a platform for lies?
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Your correspondents (Letters, 9 July) who argue that the historian David Irving should be allowed to publish his views on the grounds of free speech imply that the public at large has some faculty to distinguish right from wrong, and to act accordingly. Publication of Mr Irving's views, they argue, will thus merely reveal the extent of the falsehoods they contain.
Surely if such a general faculty existed, however, Hitler would never have come to power in the first place, and Mr Irving's opinions would be both irrelevant and repugnant.
Yours,
STEVE POMEROY
Capel,
Surrey
9 July
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments