
	Where results make sense

Topic: Claims of hate speech or hate acts against holocaust deniers

Related Topics

Hate speech

Interactive media

Furry

Venetian Red

Charles Murray (author)

Patchy the Pirate

Affirmative action

VCSEL

Political correctness

Benjamin Whorf

Godard

Edward Sapir

Altria

List of Croatians

Scup

In the News (Mon 7 Dec 09)

Northern Trust

Marvin Harrison

Peter Chernin

Gary Locke

Match Play

Penelope Cruz

Mickey Rourke

AR Rahman

Danny Boyle

Hugh Jackman

	Hate speech : search word
		'''Hate speech''' is a controversial term for speech intended to hurt, intimidate, or to incite violence or prejudicial action against someone; and which is motivated by hatred of them because of some innocuous personal characteristic such as race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, inherent sexual orientation, or disability.
		Some critics view hate speech legal restrictions as attempts to control not only the speech actions, but the thoughts of individuals, and, thus, an attempt to make any speech intended to hurt and intimidate equilivant to a thoughtcrime.
		In some cases it is held that prohibiting hate speech is part of a campaign of political correctness intended to censor any expression of that idea altogether.
	www.searchword.org /ha/hate-speech.html (1938 words)

	AIJAC - Racist Anti-Racism at Durban
		The accusations made against the Jewish state of colonialism, war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, ethnic cleansing and acts of apartheid are of the same nature, blaming a whole community for the most heinous crimes.
		The charges in the declaration of colonialism, war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, acts of apartheid, ethnic cleansing, the characterization of Israel as a racist state, the assertion of a claimed Palestinian right of return and a call for a repeal of the Israeli Law of Return are all of this nature.
		Against this background, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan's announcement that "the comparison of Zionism to racism is dead" rings empty, to say the least.
	www.aijac.org.au /updates/Sep-01/030901.html (3936 words)

	neo-neocon: We didn't start the fire: should Holocaust Denial be criminalized?
		Holocaust denial, seen in this light, is a continuation of Nazi thought, and was in fact part of the Nazi plan--and, if allowed to grow and spread, might represent their final triumph.
		Holocaust deniers like Irving revel in their persecution, and attract many of those who are too young to remember the horrors Hitler unleashed.
		At a recent speech delivered at Yale University, Finkelstein equated the Jewish concern over Holocaust denial with a "level of mental hysteria." Clearly, we must first question his very "professorship." Anyone who so blatantly disregards facts and vehemently supports the murder of innocent children is worthy neither of academia nor of the title of professor.
	neo-neocon.blogspot.com /2006/02/we-didnt-start-fire-should-holocaust.html (13091 words)

	The Ultimate Hate speech Dog Breeds Information Guide and Reference
		Prohibiting hate speech does nothing to change the ideas that give rise to the opinions behind the 'offensive' terms.
		Furthermore, words which once 'embodied' negative hate speech connotations, such as 'queer' or 'fag (pejorative)' against homosexuals, 'nigger' against people of African origin, have themselves been 'reclaimed' by their respective communities, who attached more positive meanings to the words, so undermining their value to those who wish to use them in a negative sense.
		Claims of hate speech or hate acts against holocaust deniers
	www.dogluvers.com /dog_breeds/Hate_speech (1739 words)

	The Washington Monthly
		There are acts that go beyond speech to actually being part of violent acts, such as conspiracy, incitement, etc. But Holocaust denial is exactly the kind of "bad idea" for which the best counter are "good ideas" -- facts and evidence -- not suppression of speech.
		Suppression of contrary speech is only the best way to advance a desired believe when the desired belief is, in fact, wrong, which is why it is the universal tactic of repressive totalitarianism that relies on deceiving the masses.
		Because claims that the Holocaust never took place are demonstrably false, potentially attractive to the Austrian and German public and threatening to vulnerable members of both societies that have endured extreme persecution, I cannot see any valid argument in defense of it's decriminalization.
	www.washingtonmonthly.com /archives/individual/2006_02/008273.php (15819 words)

	Obsidian Wings: Free Speech and Other Stuff
		The historical record was preserved and rescued from the deniers and the defendants and anyone who seriously indulges in holocaust denial is simply ignoring vast libraries of documentary evidence, or explaining it all away as forgery, or whatever tortured arguments of necessity can be summoned in contravention of truth.
		Meaning that public acts (like speeches, publishing pictures or books) trying to incite hatred and/or violence against "one part of the population" (a group defined by their religion, race, nationality) is still punishable.
		Both David Irving, who claims the Holocaust never happened, and Scott McLellan, who claims he has never heard of any allegation of the US sending people to Syria, are telling a peculiarly pernicious kind of lie.
	obsidianwings.blogs.com /obsidian_wings/2006/02/free_speech_and.html (11255 words)

	AlterNet: In Defense of Free Thought
		The case made for criminalizing speech in the West is usually based on the concept that it is not OK to yell fire in a crowded theater -- or incite violence.
		The argument for jailing Irving is that denying the Holocaust is equivalent to stoking the fires of anti-Semitic violence.
		What makes free speech work is not censorship borne out of polictial correctness or worry about the results, but rather a population that is smart enough and educated enough to be able to handle both sides of an argument without resorting to violence, and then able to form an opinion based on logic and facts.
	www.alternet.org /columnists/story/32693 (6516 words)

	Limits on Free Speech \| MetaFilter (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-02)
		The criminalization of denying the Shoah is a key to understanding the ongoing tabooization of the Third Reich in Germany and Austria.
		The Austrian populace was not pushing for a law against denying the horrors of the Third Reich (which is what the Austrian law says; it is not was not designed as a Holocaust denial law, since the Holocaust had yet to be recognized by the world in the late 1940s).
		If you believe that hate speech should be banned, then Holocaust denial is a clear case of it, and a particularly pernicious one at that.
	www.metafilter.com /mefi/48900 (13173 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)