Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Horowitz Speech Shut Down at Emory


libertyworld

Recommended Posts

By Ruth Malhotra and Orit Sklar Friday, October 26, 2007

On Wednesday evening, the Emory University Chapter of the College Republicans hosted acclaimed author and activist David Horowitz for a lecture on radical Islam as part of Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week. From the beginning of Horowitz’s speech, rowdy protesters continually interrupted him and less than half an hour into the event, the crowd became so disruptive that police were called in and Horowitz had to be escorted off stage.

The event was part of the Terrorism Awareness Project, a program of the David Horowitz Freedom Center dedicated to waking up American college students to the threat of militant Islam. As soon as Horowitz was introduced, protesters began their efforts with loud boos and chants of “Heil Hitler.” Despite the people who stood with their backs to Horowitz and the shouting of obscenities and other remarks from audience members, Horowitz attempted to deliver his speech that covered academic freedom and radical Islam. Considering the actions of the audience and the problem of universities only giving students half the story, Horowitz asked the audience, “How can you learn if you can’t see the arguments?” This event was a perfect example of the left’s intolerance to other points of view. Students who had the opportunity to ask questions they wrote down on index cards were never given the chance to hear them answered because of the actions of those who do not believe in free speech for those who hold opposing points of view.

Over 300 people – what appeared to be a cross-section of students, professors, and Atlanta community members – packed into White Hall where the event was held. The audience included a wide range of Leftists from Amnesty International, Veterans for Peace, and Students for Justice in Palestine, as well as Muslim groups such as the Muslim Student Association. In addition, members of “National Project to Defend Dissent & Critical Thinking in Academia,” an organization dedicated to opposing Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week events throughout the country, participated in the protests dressed in orange attire as a reference to Guantanamo Bay. There was also a sizable group of men and women dressed in traditional Muslim garb as well as students wearing Kafiyehs, a symbol of Arab solidarity...

“I’ve spoken at Emory University several times and I’ve never seen it this bad,” said Horowitz responding to the crowd as they shouted and jeered. “This is exactly what the fascists did in Germany in the 1930s.” The loud chants, sign-waving, and disruptive gestures continued to escalate from audience members until the atmosphere was so chaotic that even the police present were unable to subdue the crowd. Horowitz was led off stage and left the campus under tight security, and the event came to an abrupt end. After Senior Vice Provost for Community and Diversity Ozzie Harris announced that audience members should sit down and let the speech continue or risk being forcibly removed, protesters shouted, “Everybody stand up, they can't take us all!” and “Stand up in solidarity!” At the end, when Horowitz’ speech could no longer continue, chants of “This is what democracy looks like” shot up throughout the audience.

Many in the audience left the event disappointed. After the event, even some students who proclaimed their hatred David Horowitz expressed their disappointment and sadness with what transpired. Other students and professors expressed that this made Emory look bad. “Even the students who did not agree with David Horowitz did not get a chance to speak their minds because of the protesters’ disruptive actions,” said Emory Professor Mark Bauerlein. “No one was able to listen to the lecture or to speak themselves – pro or con – everyone was shut down.”

Although the actions of campus leftists culminated during David Horowitz’s lecture, in reality what transpired is indicative of what has become a toxic environment on today’s university campuses. Conservative viewpoints are repeatedly stifled and censored, and often those who dare to question the left-wing orthodoxy are treated as second-class citizens on campus. Emory University is no exception, and has once again demonstrated the campus community’s utter intolerance and inability to engage in civil debate.

Protesters were plentiful, but their ability to be open-minded and respectful was non-existent. It was a prime example of the state of college campuses where mob rule is the only rule. The crowd which turned hostile at Horowitz’s introduction was not there to listen to his speech and give their opinion or ask a question, rather it was to keep the ideas that Horowitz was expressing from the minds of the students who were eager to hear them.

It is very ironic that the very people who claim to “stand against censorship” and “defend critical thinking” on campus are the ones who were responsible for shutting down Horowitz’s speech on Wednesday evening. Rather than engage in a civil debate about the critical issues facing our country and our world, leftists from a cross-section of the community once again exposed their true agenda: to stifle all viewpoints not lockstep in line with their own.

Was Wednesday’s event an indication that these ideas are unwelcome at Emory? What has been going on in the classroom or on campus in general to facilitate such a reaction? How will the university administration react? The logical inconsistency of the left couldn’t be clearer: Students can listen to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speak, but they cannot hear David Horowitz.

Unfortunately, the audience conducted itself in an unwelcoming manner and ultimately an embarrassment for everyone involved. “The campus Left pretends to believe in free speech but can't even allow mass murder and terrorism to be criticized,” said David French, an authority on campus affairs who currently leads the Alliance Defense Fund’s Center for Academic Freedom. “Islamic fascists threaten our very existence, but these speech suppressors imagine these killers either don’t exist or that they should be honored for their “diversity.’”

What transpired at Emory on Wednesday night demonstrates the reality of this assertion, and the outrageous actions that result when Islamic Fascism and University Leftism converge on a college campus. In case these campus censors haven’t noticed, our very civilization is being threatened, but they line up with the same enemy who would obliterate every freedom these Leftwing extremists choose to abuse...

...Despite the debacle at Emory and the sad state of campus affairs it generally represents, conservative students around the country have reason for optimism. Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week demonstrates that College Republicans and other conservative campus groups are more organized than ever, and determined to tackle tough issues such as the threat of global Islamic Jihad. Rather than backing down in the face of such extreme opposition from the campus left and their sympathizers, conservatives must step up the fight. By promoting educated discussion on campus, conservative students are taking the lead in raising awareness of the critical challenges facing our country. They are also exposing the lack of academic freedom and intellectual diversity in every aspect of the campus environment.

Armed with many resources provided by groups such as the David Horowitz Freedom Center, conservatives must continue to advance their message on campus. By all indications they are doing just that, as over 100 campuses across America are hosting speeches, film screenings, and other events this week as part of the Terrorism Awareness Project. “Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week has been very effective across the country, and even our opposition demonstrates that,” said Horowitz, reflecting on Wednesday’s debacle at Emory. “We’ve already won this debate.”

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read....52-C5F7D5612937

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 40
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Unlimited

    9

  • libertyworld

    7

  • Bob26003

    6

  • Bill Hill

    5

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I take anything that Horowitz says with a pinch of salt, as he used to be a prominent and outspoken leftist, promoting armed revolution and the like.

I question his motives for suddenly changing from Left to Right at the top of the hat. His parents, staunchant Marxists must be proud of him :hmm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I take anything that Horowitz says with a pinch of salt, as he used to be a prominent and outspoken leftist, promoting armed revolution and the like.

I question his motives for suddenly changing from Left to Right at the top of the hat. His parents, staunchant Marxists must be proud of him :hmm:

At the top of a hat?

It would probably take all of 5 minutes to read about why he changed.

The fact that he was once a radical leftist and then woke up gives him more credibility, not less.

Also, this is not even about what Horowitz is saying... As if he was the only one behind these events.

"Last night I ended Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week on an unexpectedly high note at Dartmouth. Even the hostile questions had less of an edge to them than they had at Brown, DePaul, and the University of Rhode Island, and the overwhelming majority of questioners were sympathetic to the perspective I was representing."

"I think the people in the audience who had come planning to ask angry questions were caught flat-footed by the stark difference between the Spencer they read about in their propaganda and the Spencer of real life. Which is an object lesson in why the Leftists and jihad sympathizers who have so thoroughly propagandized American campuses at this point will ultimately fail. Those they have propagandized will begin to experience cognitive dissonance, noticing the increasing disparity between the lies they've been fed and the realities of the world -- and then the nasty, foolish little empire will begin to crumble."

Posted by Robert Spencer of Jihad watch at October 27, 2007 7:22 AM

Edited by libertyworld
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A very revealing look into the mind of a campus leftist today.

After David Horowitz’s speech at George Washington University last night, Young America’s Foundation’s Jason Mattera caught up with Iraq Veterans Against the War’s Adam Kokesh. Kokesh is the lefty who led the campus-wide smear of YAF a couple of weeks ago.

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/10/26/hot-...ho-smeared-yaf/

And from the comments following the video...

"What I find so interesting about this video is that we almost never hear leftists trying to calmly rationalize their point of view. What we typically hear is them screaming, cursing, shouting down otherwise rational speakers, and ultimately ending the debate with ad hominem attacks (usually by calling their opponents “racists”). After watching this video, it’s clear why. Watching those two try to make their way through a cogent argument was actually sad. When they are asked to articulate their position on radical Islam — which leftists are almost never asked to do — it becomes so painfully obvious that they have no position at all.

They literally could not explain what they believe — and apparently are there fighting for — because they believe nothing. Their job, plan and simple, is to oppose: oppose free speech, oppose capitalism, oppose Christianity, oppose the US, oppose genuine discourse, oppose intellectualism. They have no idea WHY they oppose it; they just know that their leftist professors have told them TO oppose it. It is truly a sad and pathetic dogma to which they’ve attached themselves. They’re screaming I’M FOR NOTHING, NOTHING AT ALL.

And all the while, because they have been rendered incapable of intelligent inquiry, they attach themselves tighter and tighter to an ideology whose fundamental beliefs are easily articulated: Islamofascism. As the ax comes down upon their tender necks, these pitiful children will be screaming, “But we defended you!” No darlings, you never defended them at all. You protected them. You allowed them to flourish. But you never defended them because you can’t defend what you don’t understand."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So much for freadom of speech. the liberals are the most self centered and close minded people you will ever meet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I question his motives for suddenly changing from Left to Right at the top of the hat. His parents, staunchant Marxists must be proud of him :hmm:

I agree,

looks like this incident changed his mind/views-

Horowitz was a confidant of Black Panthers leader Huey P. Newton, and provided legal and financial assistance to the black revolutionary organization. He would later cite experiences with his involvement in the Panthers as the primary catalyst for reassessing his views. In December 1974, his close friend Betty Van Patter, a bookkeeper for the Panthers, was murdered

While the case officially went unsolved, Horowitz has maintained that the Panthers were responsible for her murder, committed in order to silence Van Patter from revealing the organization's financial corruption, and thereafter covered up the killing.

wiki.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree,

looks like this incident changed his mind/views-

Horowitz was a confidant of Black Panthers leader Huey P. Newton, and provided legal and financial assistance to the black revolutionary organization. He would later cite experiences with his involvement in the Panthers as the primary catalyst for reassessing his views. In December 1974, his close friend Betty Van Patter, a bookkeeper for the Panthers, was murdered

While the case officially went unsolved, Horowitz has maintained that the Panthers were responsible for her murder, committed in order to silence Van Patter from revealing the organization's financial corruption, and thereafter covered up the killing.

wiki.

The problem is that the Panthers don't represent the whole of the leftist community. While there is vocal support for the group by a large portion of the left, there are also many who disagree with how they go about doing things. Then again, at least Horowitz has a reason for turning to the right. I've known quite a few people who have gone from left to right and vice versa simply because it's the "cool" thing to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe they didn't want a bigot speaking at their University? Is that so irrational?

College Republicans trying to get a racist to speak on campus........... Who woulda thunk it :rolleyes:

And you guys wonder why no one takes your politics seriously

Just have a look at some titles of his publications

# The Race Card: White Guilt, Black Resentment, and the Assault on Truth and Justice (Prima Lifestyles, 1997 ISBN 0761509429)

# The Art of Political War And Other Radical Pursuits (Spence Publishing, 2000 ISBN 1890626287)

# How to Beat the Democrats and Other Subversive Ideas (Spence Publishing, 2002 ISBN 1890626414)

# Radical Son: A Generational Odyssey (1998 ISBN 0-684-84005-7) autobiography

# Uncivil Wars: The Controversy Over Reparations For Slavery (2002 ISBN 1-893554-44-9)

# Hating Whitey: and Other Progressive Causes ISBN 1-890626-21-X

# The Politics of Bad Faith: The Radical Assault on America’s Future (Free Press, 2000 ISBN 0684856794)

# Left Illusions: An Intellectual Odyssey (2003 ISBN 1-890626-51-1)

# Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left (Regnery Publishing, 2004 ISBN 0-89526-076-X)

# The Anti-Chomsky Reader with Peter Collier (Encounter Books, 2004 ISBN 1-893554-97-X)

# The End Of Time (2005 ISBN 1-59403-080-4)

# The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America (Regnery Publishing, 2006 ISBN 0-89526-003-4)

# Shadow Party: How George Soros, Hillary Clinton, and Sixties Radicals Seized Control of the Democratic Party (Thomas Nelson Books, 2007 ISBN 1595551034)

# Indoctrination U:The Left's War Against Academic Freedom (Encounter Books, 2007 ISBN 1594031908)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Horowit...rvative_writer)

Allegations of bigotry

Chip Berlet, writing for the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), identified Horowitz's Center for the Study of Popular Culture as one of 17 "right-wing foundations and think tanks support[ing] efforts to make bigoted and discredited ideas respectable." Berlet accused Horowitz of blaming slavery on "'black Africans ... abetted by dark-skinned Arabs'" and of "attack[ing] minority 'demands for special treatment' as 'only necessary because some blacks can't seem to locate the ladder of opportunity within reach of others,' rejecting the idea that they could be the victims of lingering racism."[49] Responding with an open letter to Morris Dees, president of the SPLC, Horowitz stated that his reminder that the slaves transported to America were bought from African and Arab slavers was a response to demands that only whites pay blacks reparations, not to hold Africans and Arabs solely responsible for slavery, and that the statement that he had denied lingering racism was "a calculated and carefully constructed lie." The letter said that Berlet's work was "so tendentious, so filled with transparent misrepresentations and smears that if you continue to post the report you will create for your Southern Poverty Law Center a well-earned reputation as a hate group itself."[50] The SPLC refused,[36] and subsequent critical pieces on Berlet and the SPLC have been featured on Horowitz's website and personal blog.[51][52]

Tim Wise, self-described "anti-racist essayist, lecturer and activist" criticized[53] Horowitz in the left-wing publication, Znet for associating with alleged racists, pointing to his acceptance of funding from the Bradley Foundation, which supported the publication of The Bell Curve, as well for running a modified piece by white nationalist Jared Taylor on the media treatment of black-on-white murders. When Horowitz ran the piece, he admitted that the decision to do so would be controversial, but denied that Taylor was a racist, instead arguing that his "racialism" was an example of identity politics precipitated by an intellectual surrender to multiculturalism; Horowitz denied that he and his publication share Taylor's agenda.[54]

Edited by Bob26003
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Making Nice With Racists: David Horowitz and The Soft Pedaling Of White Supremacy

<a href="http://www.zmag.org/Sustainers/content/2002-12/16wise.cfm" target="_blank">http://www.zmag.org/Sustainers/content/2002-12/16wise.cfm</a>

=========

David Horowitz on Slavery: “Where’s the Gratitude?”

<a href="http://www.revcom.us/a/106/horowitz-en.html" target="_blank">http://www.revcom.us/a/106/horowitz-en.html</a>

=============

URI NAACP, Uhuru SaSa: Horowitz racist

<a href="http://media.www.ramcigar.com/media/storag...t-1116220.shtml" target="_blank">http://media.www.ramcigar.com/media/storag...t-1116220.shtml</a>

==========

March 21, 2002 [feather]

Outrage at David Horowitz continues

Outrage at David Horowitz continues at The University of Michigan after his talk Tuesday night was cut short by security. Yesterday UM students rallied against racism and ignorance, stating that "We are here to show a united front against ignorance. It's important to show that the kind of ignorant attitude (seen in Horowitz's lecture) will not be tolerated" and that "This rally is a significant step to let people know that the students of color have allies and that his view is not the only view." Closing out with the chant "I am black and I am proud," the rally--at least as it is reported in The Michigan Daily--exhibits some of the classic confusions of left liberal thought on today's campuses.

<a href="http://www.erinoconnor.org/archives/2002/0...ge_at_davi.html" target="_blank">http://www.erinoconnor.org/archives/2002/0...ge_at_davi.html</a>

**************

Why am I not suprised?

Busted!

And the true colors are showing.

Edited by Bob26003
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm...dunno... this smacks of the sort of tactics that the UK Unite Against Fascism organisation employ. Violent 'denial of platform' demonstrations, ad-hominem media attacks, and intimidation. Curiously, these are tactics normally associated with fascists.

Meow Purr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm...dunno... this smacks of the sort of tactics that the UK Unite Against Fascism organisation employ. Violent 'denial of platform' demonstrations, ad-hominem media attacks, and intimidation. Curiously, these are tactics normally associated with fascists.

Meow Purr.

lol good point ship's cat.

It's ironic that the left don't realise just how fascist they can be..

I guess they're too seduced by the socialism in 'national socialism'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So much for freadom of speech. the liberals are the most self centered and close minded people you will ever meet.

It's ironic that the left don't realise just how fascist they can be..

It's true, from the report given they do appear to be a bunch of naive idealistic ******s.

However to assume they represent liberals or the left as a whole is a huge flaw in logic.

I believe such traits are more representative of students than liberals or the left in general.

Edited by Ins0mniac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So much for freadom of speech. the liberals are the most self centered and close minded people you will ever meet.

close minded to bigotry?....look what the neo-cons did to the professor in colorado for speaking his mind..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

March 21, 2002 [feather]

Outrage at David Horowitz continues

Outrage at David Horowitz continues at The University of Michigan after his talk Tuesday night was cut short by security. Yesterday UM students rallied against racism and ignorance, stating that "We are here to show a united front against ignorance. It's important to show that the kind of ignorant attitude (seen in Horowitz's lecture) will not be tolerated" and that "This rally is a significant step to let people know that the students of color have allies and that his view is not the only view." Closing out with the chant "I am black and I am proud," the rally--at least as it is reported in The Michigan Daily--exhibits some of the classic confusions of left liberal thought on today's campuses.

<a href="http://www.erinoconnor.org/archives/2002/0...ge_at_davi.html" target="_blank">http://www.erinoconnor.org/archives/2002/0...ge_at_davi.html</a>

Yep, I couldn't agree more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Screw that!

I would not want a known racist and bigot spreading his hate at my University either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Screw that!

I would not want a known racist and bigot spreading his hate at my University either.

You take the titles of his books, without having read the books, and assume, because they discuss race-relations and the author is white, that he is racist.

You are making assumptions based on your own stupid biases, and making an assumption that itself is based on racism (white-people can't write about race-relations, unless they agree with a certain viewpoint, otherwise they are racist). What proof do you have those books, which you have not read, are racist?

And despite your claims of being a "liberal" or a "progressive" you are exposing yourself as what you truly are, a fascist. You are saying that because someone has a viewpoint that is not exactly in line with yours, that he has no right to speak, deserving of labels such as bigot and should be silenced or censored. The only bigot here is you, Bob.

Edited by BrucePrime
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You take the titles of his books, without having read the books, and assume, because they discuss race-relations and the author is white, that he is racist.

You are making assumptions based on your own stupid biases, and making an assumption that itself is based on racism (white-people can't write about race-relations, unless they agree with a certain viewpoint, otherwise they are racist). What proof do you have those books, which you have not read, are racist?

And despite your claims of being a "liberal" or a "progressive" you are exposing yourself as what you truly are, a fascist. You are saying that because someone has a viewpoint that is not exactly in line with yours, that he has no right to speak, deserving of labels such as bigot and should be silenced or censored. The only bigot here is you, Bob.

This guy has been exposed. And I am not the only one who can see it.

You are just defending a racist. It's cool, I understand.

Have a look at this Diddy by racist Horowitz:

What About The Debt Blacks Owe To America?

Slavery existed for thousands of years before the Atlantic slave trade was born, and in all societies. But in the thousand years of its existence, there never was an anti-slavery movement until white Christians - Englishmen and Americans -- created one. If not for the anti-slavery attitudes and military power of white Englishmen and Americans, the slave trade would not have been brought to an end. If not for the sacrifices of white soldiers and a white American president who gave his life to sign the Emancipation Proclamation, blacks in America would still be slaves. If not for the dedication of Americans of all ethnicities and colors to a society based on the principle that all men are created equal, blacks in America would not enjoy the highest standard of living of blacks anywhere in the world, and indeed one of the highest standards of living of any people in the world. They would not enjoy the greatest freedoms and the most thoroughly protected individual rights anywhere. Where is the gratitude of black America and its leaders for those gifts?

=========

Screw him,

I believe this guy said it best:

"Racism, even in the pretense of intellectual conservative debate," Omoayo, a senior, said, "will not be tolerated. It doesn't have to be okay. It's not okay."

Edited by Bob26003
Link to comment
Share on other sites

.

You are just defending a racist. It's cool, I understand.

a neocon defending racism?..noway what a novel concept..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Racism, even in the pretense of intellectual conservative debate," Omoayo, a senior, said, "will not be tolerated. It doesn't have to be okay. It's not okay."

Good....good! Use your aggressive feelings! Let the hate flow through you...and your journey to fascism will be complete.

Oh and I'm afraid.. Horowitz's next speech will be quite operational.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good....good! Use your aggressive feelings! Let the hate flow through you...and your journey to fascism will be complete.

Oh and I'm afraid.. Horowitz's next speech will be quite operational.

I don't care where the racist speaks. But I know that if he came to my college spreading his hate and racism, I would boo him and throw a rotten tomato at him.

Horowitz is just a joke....................

That racist assshat doesn't belong anywhere near an academic institution.

And BTW, there is a reason there are more Liberals in the educated fields. Figure it out.

Edited by Bob26003
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't care where the racist speaks. But I know that if he came to my college spreading his hate and racism, I would boo him and throw a rotten tomato at him.

linked-image

You want this, don't you?

The hate is swelling in you now. Take your leftie weapon. Use it. Horowitz is unarmed.

Strike him down with it. Give in to your anger. With each passing moment, you make yourself more my servant. :devil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

linked-image

You want this, don't you?

The hate is swelling in you now. Take your leftie weapon. Use it. Horowitz is unarmed.

Strike him down with it. Give in to your anger. With each passing moment, you make yourself more my servant. :devil:

I hear you, I get your message...... Free Speech. I understand.

But racism is one of those things that does not have to be tolerated.

I am sure that if a radical Muslim came to your University preaching radical jihad, you would not tolerate it as well.

But I do see your point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hear you, I get your message...... Free Speech. I understand.

But racism is one of those things that does not have to be tolerated.

I am sure that if a radical Muslim came to your University preaching radical jihad, you would not tolerate it as well.

But I do see your point.

If you believe in allowing the expression of everything except the things you strongly disagree, you do not support free speech. It's as simple as that.

There's no such thing as partial free speech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't care where the racist speaks. But I know that if he came to my college spreading his hate and racism, I would boo him and throw a rotten tomato at him.

Perhaps you could organise a few book-burning parties as well ? :)

And BTW, there is a reason there are more Liberals in the educated fields. Figure it out.

If you mean educational fields, (esp things like political science etc) then perhaps it's because they couldn't hold down a job in the "real" world ? :P

I am sure that if a radical Muslim came to your University preaching radical jihad, you would not tolerate it as well.

But I do see your point.

This has been happening in the UK. Provided they do not break the law, then they are permitted. Curiously - and in an echo of the situatino at Emory - radical Jihadi's where, until recently, permitted to make hate speeches on UK University campuses. Right wing parties (legal ones, not nutters like the NF) however where banned by the University authorities, or by the National Union of Students. Bias ? Hatred of the West ? Nah. Surely not.

There's no such thing as partial free speech.

Actually, there is, and both the UK and the USA (indeed, all democracies) practice it. It is against the law to make speeches that incite criminal activity. In the UK, we now also have laws to prevent speeches that incite 'hatred' against certain groups or beliefs. (one reason why the Jihadists can't make their speeches in public anymore). Similarly, it has long been illegal to make speeches or comments that are libelous. (although that falls under Civil law, not Criminal.) It is also illegal to make speeches that reveal state secrets. (In the UK, it is a crime to reveal the colour of the toilet paper used in the Prime Ministers residence. Doesn't that just make you feel safer ? :P)

Meow Purr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, there is, and both the UK and the USA (indeed, all democracies) practice it. It is against the law to make speeches that incite criminal activity. In the UK, we now also have laws to prevent speeches that incite 'hatred' against certain groups or beliefs. (one reason why the Jihadists can't make their speeches in public anymore). Similarly, it has long been illegal to make speeches or comments that are libelous. (although that falls under Civil law, not Criminal.) It is also illegal to make speeches that reveal state secrets. (In the UK, it is a crime to reveal the colour of the toilet paper used in the Prime Ministers residence. Doesn't that just make you feel safer ? :P)

Yeah. But the problem with that is that even totalitarian regimes will tell you that the lack of freedom of speech is for the people's own good and that they allow you to say anything the state agrees with. So what makes a state with "freedom of speech" different?

Does deciding whether a country has "freedom of speech" just depend on a value judgement of what it is that the government will not allow you to say?

Is freedom of speech an illusion?

Edited by Ins0mniac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.