The Norwegian festival of literature in Lillehammer withdrew its invitation on Thursday to British holocaust revisionist David Irving, initially invited to give a speech on the concept of truth (you just have to love the irony of it). Needless to say the invitation stirred quite a fuss, especially among Norwegian writers, not too happy to be associated with this advocate of holocaust denial. Both the invitation itself and, obviously, its withdrawal gave cause for yet a round of debates on freedom of expression. Since the Danish Muhammed cartoons some two and a half years ago, the concept of freedom of expression has been interpreted to the extreme. No-one or nothing is sacred or safe, as the freedom of expression is to be understood as an absolute – in order to defend the one subject that weighs heavily on the hearts of so many: Islamism – or regular Islam, for that matter.

Many of those championing absolute freedom of expression today were dead set against it three years ago – if it attacked Christianity or Christian values, but have later come to realise that in order to defend discrediting Islam and its followers, we need to do so under protection of absolute freedom of expression, or their arguments lose all credibility. A small price to pay, perhaps, for those who actually oppose freedom of expression, but who nevertheless regard the war on Islam (disguised as a war on terror) too urgent not to sacrifice their anti-freedom of expression views.

I’m not saying that Mr. Irving and the likes of him should be denied their evident right to speak their mind, when and where they want, but in my view there’s a distinct difference between allowing them to do so and inviting them to do so – at a fee, all expenses covered.

Therein lies the reason why so many Norwegian writers – and others – protested his presence. Which is perfectly understandable and as it should be.