Until today, Facebook's policy was to tolerate Holocaust denial groups. '[We] believe people have a right to discuss these ideas and we want Facebook to be a place where ideas, even controversial ideas, can be discussed,' a spokesman said.
(Illustration by Jake Turcotte)Photos (1 of 1)
Is Facebook changing its tune on Holocaust deniers?
By Matthew Shaer | 05.11.09
It’s been a rocky year for the kids over at Facebook, who have weathered complaints about their new interface, and a wave of assaults from increasingly savvy hackers. The latest debacle? A brawl over free speech.
At issue are pages maintained by a community of Holocaust deniers, which have raised the ire of critics here and abroad. The loudest voice of protest belongs to Brian Cuban, an attorney and the brother of Dallas Mavericks’ owner Mark Cuban. For months, Cuban has been trying to rally users against the proliferation of public groups such as the “Holocaust is a Holohaux.” Until recently, Facebook management remained silent.
Then last week, Chris Matyszczyk, a blogger for CNET, conducted an interview with Facebook spokesman Barry Schnitt. Schnitt told Matyszczyk that, “of course, we abhor Nazi ideals and find Holocaust denial repulsive and ignorant.’ And yet, he continued:
….we believe people have a right to discuss these ideas and we want Facebook to be a place where ideas, even controversial ideas, can be discussed. Of course, we have some limits.
In the spotlight
After Matyszczyk’s interview hit the virtual presses, the furor over the Facebook groups was raised anew. On the homepage of the Jewish Internet Defense Force, a group dedicated to “leading the fight against antisemitism and terrorism on the web,” a recent post decried Facebook’s stance:
Facebook rarely, if ever, took action until the media got involved, giving them bad press, and even then, they still did not do enough proactively to rid their platform of hatred.
In a newer interview with CNN, Schnitt told a reporter that Facebook had conducted a healthy internal debate over the issue, and decided, in the end, to let the site stay “a place where people can discuss all kinds of ideas, including controversial ones.” He added a few caveats. According to CNN:
Schnitt said Facebook has drawn the line with pages or groups that attack an individual or incite or threaten violence. Schnitt pointed to the recent removal of the “Isle of Man KKK” page, created by residents of the island off the coast of England. Facebook interpreted the page’s advocacy of “cleansing the island of foreigners” as threatening and inciting violence, he said. Facebook receives lots of reports about such pages and actively polices the site, Schnitt said. Last year Facebook removed several pages posted by Italian neo-Nazis after complaints that they encouraged violence against gypsies.
A change in tune?
It was a thin line for Facebook to walk, and many in the blogosphere wondered last week if Facebook would eventually be forced to remove hundreds of objectionable pages. (Among the groups that the JIDF has highlighted, for instance, is “i bet i can find thousands who hate israel, we hate those child killers.” The group currently counts upwards of 55,000 members.) As of this morning, it appears that some of the Holocaust denial pages are starting to vanish from Facebook.
The social network has not yet released a public statement, and a handful of the most objectionable groups still remain live. Has Facebook reversed course? Matyszczyk, for his part, isn’t sure:
I am waiting for confirmation from Facebook and, perhaps, a statement as to whether the site has, indeed, reconsidered its position of last week, which was that it was better to have these groups out in the open, even if their ideas were “controversial,” rather than removing them from Facebook.
—-
Has Facebook begun to crack down on Holocaust deniers? For updates, follow us on Twitter.
<< How to make a Klingon forehead in 7 easy steps, and other Trekkie news | MainComments
2. Ann | 05.11.09
There are literally dozens of groups on Facebook entitled “Death to Arabs.” These groups have thousands of members, many of whom are Israeli. If Holocaust denial and/or revisionist groups are targeted and removed, why are these groups tolerated?
The only way to make sure people you agree with can speak is to support the rights of people you don’t agree with. - Eleanor Holmes Norton
If we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all. - Noam Chomsky
3. Prof. Gad Barzilai | 05.11.09
We, all humanity, must fight holocaust deniers who are fabricating and criminally distorting history. We better know who they are in order to challenge them and defeat them.
Professor Gad Barzilai
University of Washington
4. awbilinski | 05.11.09
Does a privately owned/operated web-site have an obligation to the public and; if it does, what is the nature of the obligation? Many media outlets have always exhibited a bias in one form or another (see D. Halberstam’s The Powers That Be (1979). Today, I cross my fingers and hope for accuracy and fairness. If Facebook is trying to provide an open and balanced forum, I applaud them. But we all realize that people will say anything for any number of reasons and that most of it ain’t worth the “paper” it’s printed on. I am in my fifties and remember the major news networks from the sixties and early seventies when news was presented, supposedly, in a more evenhanded and objective fashion. Walter Cronkite was the gold standard of fair and objective reporting. But then the companies that owned the networks got bought out in leveraged transactions that forced the news centers to become more profitable and the news tended to get a lot more juiced. With cable and 24/7 coverage and news-centers competing for a bigger slice of the market pie, the trend has continued. With the advent of the WWW and the ability of people to simply put up on a web-site whatever pops into their heads the barn doors are simply blown off the building. In such a context, what are we entitled to expect from a Facebook or Google? I think they must proceed on a case by case basis. To drop everything related to a certain topic in order to avoid controversy just makes this exciting medium a beige landscape that’s makes a mockery of its promise. Good luck guys. You are gonna need it.
5. Hannah | 05.11.09
What’s the point of having a terms of use if you don’t plan to follow it?
Facebook allows a group called “Lets Unite to Kill All the Retards” to exist. What kind of open honest discussion can come from a group like this? Makes you
wonder what they really discuss at those Facebook meetings.
6. QuitWhining | 05.11.09
Most of my ancesters were wiped out in the 21M group in the Ukraine. I’m not whining about it, maybe you should stop acting the victim, too. Stop trying to make it a crime to disagree with you, get over the 20th Century, and start living your lives. I do not deny it happened, nor do I deny that it was 6M of the 10M the Nazis killed. I am just tired of hearing about it.
7. keith | 05.11.09
Let the Holocaust denial make a fool of themselves. Americans are capable of seeing what is right and wrong. Sensor Holocaust denial is not doing any good but it is only bring more questions.
The Holocaust happened a long time ago. We have learned and now let move on. I am just tired to hear about it also. Don’t get me wrong. there were millions of people killed all over the world after the WWII too, but we did not hear much about them. were they any less important? At the present, Palestine people are suffering and nobody really care much about that. Millions were kill in Africa…. nothing has been done….. so let it go……
8. facebookjew | 05.12.09
If the denial pages are open for anyone to join, then let anyone join and discuss it. I don’t want to hide hate, let it fester and grow bigger with ignorance.
If, however, the sites are private and not just anyone can join, I feel that facebook could be held liable for haboring a hate site and inciting violence if someone from the page goes postal on jews or otherwise. If I walk down the street and see a swastika outside a house, I know I can walk in and talk about killing jews, blacks, gays, etc. If, however, the flag is only displayed outside when the owner is there to discuss his views, I have no problem with that.
At the end of the day, Facebook is a private site, and they have the right to decide what is on or off their site. If groups want to investigate and inform the public about the evils, then fantastic, we have something to talk about.
My own actions as a result of a business decision, hacker attacks, and now this has resulted in me (a bit outside FB demographic i think (40)) removing my Facebook page. It’s a friggen glass house.
9. rman | 05.12.09
Our country was founded by people with “unconventional” ideas.
In some regards the anti-slavery folks would have been branded “terrorists”.
While we do not have to agree with them, we must take a lot of care when we censor. I do wonder which would is more inciteful to violence, Holocaust denial or Death to your-favorite-enemy.
We cannot change the past, but we can influence the present. And one of the best ways to remember the Holocaust is to make sure genocide does not happen again - let us pay attention to Rwanda, the thousands being killed in senseless wars and refugee camps.
#6-QuitWhining - thumbs up. Although we must remember history, we must also be forward looking. the past is the past, and the future is in our hands.
I am a little troubled that the Israeli lobby wants to to censor our views.
10. gjdagis | 05.12.09
If they ban the groups that claim there was no “holocaust” then they should also ban those groups which postulate that there was. I want to hear BOTH sides of every issue and to deny me this opportunity is censorship in its most ugly form.
11. Fadel Abdallah | 05.12.09
Again, under the Zionists’ pressure and censorship, Facebook was forced to remove the comments of Holocaust deniers, yet they continue to allow “Death to Arabs” groups to spew their venomous bigotry. And yet, you continue to see many people, with split vision, who live in the island of denial, continue denying that Israeli Zionists control every aspect of American life. One can say without exaggeration that “Political-Military America is an Israeli-Zionist occupied territory!”
Possibly, because of my comment above, I will be censored!
12. George Samuels | 05.12.09
Freedom of cpeech is a most sacred matter under the Constitution per the Supreme Court. Freedom allows words, statements, and ideas many people may hate. “Hate” itself is constitutional. The Constitution allows the freedom for people to stop using a word, phrase, or idea. Think of a nation that doesn’t permit speech. America should nor become one. We are taught some British colonies fought for freedom. Are those colonies now to fight against freedom of speech?
13. evin | 05.12.09
I am surprised to see Professor Gad Barzilai use “we” so loosely. He certainly doesn’t speak for me who thinks that this issue is facebooks to deal with and that it should be guided like the principle that ALL are entitled to freedom of opinion. A freedom that the Jews in Nazi Germany were refused; and that one, who supposedly abhors the holocaust, would declare with the voice of humanity, the same voice Hitler himself claimed to have, that all that are human must oppose this denial. I would hope, upon reflection, that the hypocrisy of your statement is obvious.
And how, professor, does history, a social science, become criminal without first making it a crime to do certain academic works? Ironically, this too was a tactic of the national socialist state.
You are what you hate buddy.
14. Michael | 05.13.09
I too would like to hear both sides of the argument. I am sorry but I am not convinced about what truly happened and would like the see and hear dialogue from both sides to form my own opinion, right or wrong. There has been too much brainwashing going on by those in control of the media for me to follow their take on historic events.
15. James | 05.13.09
Well since Facebook obviously doesn’t want these people, I’m sure there are other sites that will let them debate it. America is becoming less and less American every day.
16. Mo | 05.13.09
Goering and his cohorts were masters of media control. Within their sphere of influence (countries under Nazi control), they pretty much dictated the course of public discourse on their actions vis a vis the Jews, the Gypsies, the Soviets and all of the ‘Others’.
I find remarkable similarities in how current day discourses are being controlled. It is very obvious to too many of us that concerted efforts are being made to squelch any discussion or opposition to the viewpoint being put forward by the supporters of the Israeli position. One only has to click on the comment section of any publication dealing with Israeli actions, for it to become very obvious that there is a clique of ‘cyber-trolls’ whose function it is to try to demonize anyone commenting negatively on any Israeli action.
If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is almost certainly a duck.
17. J.B. | 05.13.09
The Holocaust isn’t an argument with two sides. The fact that some readers could be led to think such a thing is a direct pointer to why having this kind of group allowed on Facebook is questionable. I have close elderly friends who were in concentration camps and watched their entire families get taken away and slaughtered. I have relatives who were killed in concentration camps. And so for me, to hear someone call the existence of the Holocaust an issue with two sides is disturbing.
Try to imagine if someone intentionally killed off every member of your entire family, and then afterwards people told you that it didn’t happen. Just sit with the emotional weight of that and you can understand why people might object to space being created for people who don’t believe the Holocaust happened to gather and gain strength.
I agree with other commenters, there is absolutely no reason why Holocaust deniers should be censored and ‘Death to Arabs’ should not. It is my feeling that any group that advocates the killing of another group of people based on their race or their beliefs should not be allowed on Facebook. Nor any group which wants to rewrite history to disrespect a group of people who were decimated by such events. I would be just as opposed to a website that tried to deny the Ukrainian genocide or that there is genocide now happening in Rwanda.
Furthermore, to be able to call disputing genocide ‘whining’ is a clear indication of the words of a person who has not been through one. Such a lack of compassion is also astounding to me.
I absolutely believe in free speech, that it is a foundation of what makes the United States great - but, I also believe that killing based on hate is fundamentally wrong, and that any publicly used space which encourages the killing of a specific group of people or the denial of the killing of a group of people should be censored. Let them build their own websites. The Internet is a playing field for absolute free speech. Social networking sites should be regulated, or as free as the Internet at large. Once they are taking down KKK sites, they have a responsibility to remove any site which promotes hate killing, or denies hate killings their place in history.
18. Adrian | 05.13.09
All I have to say is, think for a few minutes “How many jews do I know?”
Then think for a few seconds “How many Native Americans do I know?”
19. Melissa | 05.13.09
I agree with Ann. There are groups I think are disgusting and I don’t agree with them at all, but I think freedom of speech is important.
20. bob stenger | 05.13.09
I have read the blog of #14 Michael. He is not convinced about the death camps happening. . .
Enough proof of tje death camps run by the Nazi’s in WW2 and the trials which
followed upon the winning of WW2; and people wonder if it was true?????
What is happening in our schools, etc. if ignorance of history sways young minds who can possibly believe these crimes against humanity did not occur???
Michael - thousands were killed in the Death Camps during WWII.
Go to the library and do a little research. There have been documented
proof of the camps where thousands of Jewish people were killed..
I wonder if it acually happened??? IT DID HAPPEN. . . and hopefully it will
never occur again. . . .
A Vietnam War Veteran. . . .
21. Will | 05.13.09
15. James | 05.13.09
Well since Facebook obviously doesn’t want these people, I’m sure there are other sites that will let them debate it. America is becoming less and less American every day.
Since when was the internet America?
Since when did the internet have free speech? Its controled differently by every website across it.
I agree though, hate groups of any kind. If one is removed, all should be removed.
But if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. ‘Nuff said.
22. Alden Loveshade | 05.13.09
As Facebook is a private company based in I believe the United States, it has a right to restrict what’s posted on its site. However, it is also a private company that is open to virtually all members of the public.
There’s a point where “public” and “private” blend. For example, the parking lot of a mall is private property, but anyone can park there without signing in and without asking permission. If mall representatives said “anyone can park here, but if we learn you say the holocaust didn’t happen you can’t park,” they’d likely be subject to lawsuits. The Boy Scouts faced legal problems with restrictions on accepting atheist and gay members, even though they’re private.
Facebook is online, but it’s main page requires signing up to enter. That will likely offer protection against lawsuits.
But there’s a moral issue here. If Facebook is a site that allows freedom of speech, then restricting one group and not another doesn’t fit. The court has decided that freedom of speech doesn’t include the right to say things like, “I’ll pay you $100 for every Jew you kill.” But it does include the right to say “I hate Jews.” If it includes that, it would also cover the right to say, “the Nazi holocaust never happened.”
(By the way, I am not anti-Jew. One of my three closest friends is Jewish).
23. Pete | 05.13.09
I don’t consider myself a “holocaust denier” - I believe that the intentional extermination of jews and other inferior races by the NAZIs is proven fact. What I’m not so sure of is the numbers. It’s not that I actively dispute them, but having read many accounts of early twentieth-century Zionists relating how wonderful and miraculous the holocaust was and knowing that it was used as a political tool to create Israel, I feel a healthy skepticism regarding the number “6 million.” Today, the Israelis accuse the leaders of Gaza of manipulating the number of civilian casualties and the Gazans accuse Israel of the same. This demonstrates that manipulating numbers is done for political reasons and I think also that censoring these groups is definitely taking a step in a very bad direction.
24. Rambler | 05.13.09
Holocaust denial is a very dangerous form of antisemitism. It seeks to absolve the Nazis of their crimes whilst blaming the Jews for fabricating the holocaust as part of their plot for world domination, and the worst part is that it also sets up the framework for a new assault on the Jews. If they are so sinister, if they have such control over the world, they must be stopped.
Why did the Nazis target the Jews? because they believed in the antisemitic myth of Jewish domination of the world behind the scenes. They believed that both the Capitalist west and Bolshevist East were dominated by the Jews. They believed that if Jews are allowed to live freely in society they will destroy it from within.
Allowing such ideas to take root again is downright dangerous.
Antisemitism holds the same attractions of a conspiracy theory, it is in fact one of the greatest conspiracy theories, the laymen is easily seduced by it’s wow factor, and the feeling that now he knows better than the sheep. But unlike denying the moon landings, it has proven deadly over and over again throughout history.
25. Ashley | 05.13.09
It is not up to Facebook to decide who deserves the right to free speech, and by removing groups because of their beliefs, that is what they’re trying to do.
26. Christos | 05.13.09
Although I do not agree with the holocaust denial groups, I was willing to fight and even lay down my life to protect their right to free speech as hundreds of thousands of brave soldiers have done before me. Ask any soldier he will tell you…
Why is it that Americans today forget what principals this country was founded on? So many have sacrificed so much and so many today are willing to give up that was has been given to them.
Very simple solution…If Facebook is intent on censorship and that bothers you then do not patronize Facebook and tell them why.
27. Doc | 05.13.09
Who after all is today speaking of the destruction of the Armenians?’ (Adolf Hitler,)
28. Carolyn | 05.13.09
Ignorance seen is half destroyed. Truth is unafraid of falsehood. Unmarred truth remains unchanged for all to know.
When ignorance directs someone’s behavior, we, knowing the truth, are called upon to educate - to draw out axiomatic, incontrovertible truth from within the very one deemed ignorant.
So, is it Facebook’s responsibility or is it ours?
Hate is based on fear and those voicing hate are calling out to be set free from the prison of their fear. Will we respond with intelligence and patience and free our brother and sister from their fear and ignorance? Will we work to rehabilitate and reclaim them? Will we invest ourselves in their education for our own welfare?
Nobody wants to be stupid! Renouncing one’s error may be hard and embarrassing but it is not stupid. If those in pre-school innately know what is fair, then there is hope for the ignorant. Caring enough to elevate a fearful, ignorant neighbor will elevate us all.
Many falsehoods wound our lives in small and large ways. But if we join together in truth to educate ourselves and others, wounds will heal and thought and behavior will correct.
Illegal activities are simply illegal but ignorance must be healed or it will just find a new costume.
29. Jim McPherson | 05.13.09
It appears that a group called the Jewish Internet Defense Group is trying to curtail free speech by using media pressure tactics to dictate what is and isn’t OK to say. Likewise so called “Hate Speech” legislation is pending in congress now which will make the expression of certain ideas a criminal matter. Wake up people! These things are just the salesman’s foot in the door leading to more control over our minds.
Note that groups such as this JIDG use unclear terms as part of their sales pitch. What exactly is “Holocaust Denial”? The people who run the Auschwitz tourist facility, after release of pertinant Soviet records, reduced the claimed number of people killed there from the original 4 million to 1.5 million. But the people who half a century later continue to wave the bloody flag of the holocaust still claim “6 million killed”. Is it denial to make statements based on the most recent facts available?
Or is the holocaust intended to become a new religious dogma?
Will we go the way of poor Germany and jail those who are considered heretics? Ernst Zundel has been in jail most recently for 5 years now for the “crime” of publishing studies which cast serious questions about what exactly happened in this holocaust. Consider Bishop Williamson, who is being persecuted for expressing his opinion that, based on studies such as the Lechter report, which has not been refuted, there were no homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz. If these men are wrong, let someone step foreword with facts to prove them wrong.
Lincoln once joked that as a trial attorney if one had the facts, then pound the facts. If one has the law, pound the law. If one has neither, pound the table! Those who are crying “holocaust denial” appear to have no facts so they are pounding the table until they can get anti-free speech laws to pound all of us with. Support free speech.
30. Levi | 05.13.09
By the end of WWII all of my relatives still in Germany had been executed by the Nazis because they were Jews.
Some people question if the Holocaust really happened. Others question if the numbers killed were actually as high as claimed.
There are those within my own family that privately question if the number of claimed deaths was really that high. Some believe the number of Jewish dead was lower.
I’m of the opinion that web sites such as Facebook should continue to allow their users to post their personal thoughts on this subject. To do otherwise is censorship of free speech.
If Facebook and similar sites censor users comments about the Holocaust then they should be required to also censor comments about other controversial subjects.
The only exceptions allowing censorship should be if comments advocate discrimination or violence against others.
Too often nowadays people bend to the pressure of what is perceived as being politically correct. Even some governments do this, allowing religious and political groups to dictate to them.
It’s time for people to quit crying and wringing their hands while saying “Oh, poor us. Look what the Nazis did”. It happened several generations ago, it was horrible, but it’s time to move on. The past is the past. Quit using the Holocaust as a political tool.
31. Bryan | 05.13.09
If everything the Holocaust deniers are un true ? then why block them ? could it be that there is some truth to what the Holocaust Deniers say ? dont you think its a little strange that they have found no evidence of mass graves at Treblinka? or how the dont allow anyone to investigate anything at the so called Death Camps ? let that sink in..
33. Marshall | 05.14.09
I also find it disturbing that some feel it is ok to claim the holocaust did not happen. Of course we know how many died, thanks to the detailed records kept by the germans on who, what, and how these people were gassed and destroyed. Even the US govt shares some of the blame, since it refused to allow many jews to enter the country as refugees.
This has absolutely nothing to do with free speech. Our constitutional amendments restrict the government from restricting our rights to free speech. Facebook is not the government. It is a corporation set up for only one purpose, to generate revenue for its shareholders. It can and should be held accountable for the content on its site.
34. American | 05.14.09
If Facebook is going to start deciding what opinions it will tolerate (no matter how ridiculous or hateful)… well… this will be a looooooong slippery slope indeed. They had better be prepared to do the same for all sides, beliefs, historical perspectives, etc., and, in particular, for hate speech that calls for actual killing (such as some here say is being allowed in facebook against Arabs).
35. Joan | 05.14.09
While I disagree with censorship, as several others have already mentioned, facebook is a privately owned site, which many, many regulations outlined in its terms of service, including:
3-6. You will not post content that is hateful, threatening, pornographic, or that contains nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence.
3-8. You will not use Facebook to do anything unlawful, misleading, malicious, or discriminatory.
While I’m glad that it does not, Facebook, by its own Terms of Service, is obligated to remove both anti-Semitic and anti-Arab groups.
And just to emphasize that it is a private company run from the U.S.
4-3. You will not use Facebook if you are located in a country embargoed by the U.S., or are on the U.S. Treasury Department’s list of Specially Designated Nationals.
36. Chrispy | 05.14.09
i do not believe it is right to censor a a group page that offers up an idea, regardless of its controversy. if you choose to censor one viewpoint of a subject, then you must censor all viewpoints of that subject. by only censoring one side of a subject, you limit the choices that we have available. bias censorship is not what our country is founded on.
37. Paul Stanner | 05.14.09
Dear Sirs :
In my opinion the most hateful group at Facebook is the ” Tibet Is Was And Always Will Be Part Of China ” group. The racist , juvenile , misogynist anti Western trash that emanates from this group is clearly against Facebook’s T.O.S. Many of us have complained repeatedly about this group my of whose members have stepped way over the line by viciously and publicly slandering those that have the temerity to challenge their views. They have also caused employment difficulties to many of the people that challenge them. Many of the detractors of this group have had their Facebook accounts terminate by The Big Bad Facebook Mommie for their efforts.They are STILL operating in spite of all of this. I would like to know why?
There either is a clearly defined standard for all or there isn’t. As a now very careful user of Facebook I would simply like to know which way it is.
38. Churchill | 05.14.09
Adolf Hitler had free speech and he used it effectively to stoke a second world war. Osama Bin Laden uses his free speech to incite hatred against America and the rest of the world. Free specch is so precious that we can’t let anybody just say whatever comes into his head. I don’t think the principle of free speech should be a carte blanche for people to incite hatred, fear and war. We all have a responsibilty to ensure that history does not repeat itself. In 1930 Hitler was an irrelevant politician in Germany but 9 years later he propeled Germany to war with free speech.
We must remain vigilant. Face book has a duty to ensure that it is not used as a plank to incite fear and haterd against any group or persons.
39. fightfirewithfire | 05.14.09
Facebook never censored any groups from its site. It never happened.
40. JP | 05.14.09
To those that think mentioning the holocaust is “whining”, you don’t seem to be capable of seeing past a few days. Anti-Semitism is alive and well, this is a reminder for those that quickly forget. It will happen again if people are not reminded. If you have your own casue then discuss it, but don’t allow freedom of speech to be abused by deniers.
41. coloradohummingbird | 05.14.09
The problem we have with sites that published false information on the internet or even in the media, is that if false information is repeated enough times it becomes an ‘accepted truth.’ An example is the Irish youth who added a quote to a author on Wikipedia as a hoax. Well, it stayed there and finally was picked up by news organizations who did not check their sources and it was published. The hoax was uncovered and the mainstream media had to apologize. The problem we are looking at is the ethics which we all hold to be self evident in anything we see in print. But, this is not the case with hate groups who spew so much vile speech into the arena of the internet. Yes, they have a right to their opinions, but they are not being held accountible for false, misleading or slanderous speech to include hate speech and death threats. No one is there to take recourse. So we must speak out when we see it. So certain ethical application of the true intent of freedom of speech may end up in the courts on this matter.
42. pablo | 05.14.09
WHY we always talking about the holocaust.ALL THE CRIME THAT BLACKS GO THROUGH NEED ATTENTION TOO.IT WAS HELL WHEN WE WAS IN SLAVE.THANK YOU.
43. DaDubster | 05.14.09
Aren’t the holocaust deniers part of a bigger trend, which mostly seems to involve the political and religious right: when you can’t win an argument due to the facts not being on your side, just lie and deny.
Holocaust? Didn’t happen.
Evolution? Not true.
9/11? Inside job.
Obama? A muslim.
Even if you tell an outright lie, in today’s world you can get a substantial number of people to believe you. Then you can be the leader of your own little movement, a brave hero fighting against the “mainstream media machine”.
Isn’t the real problem here the fact that there’s just too many jerks in the world?
44. SittingBull | 05.14.09
It is disingenuous to talk about the Holocaust without mentioning the genocide of Native Americans.
Hitler looked to the tactics employed by America (and the English during the Boer War) as models for his final solution.
To equate Holocaust denial with Obama is a joke. I remember all the NeoNazis that showed up for Reagan’s rallies.
I also remember them taking to the streets during in Palm Beach County to fight on Bush’s behalf.
45. cecil | 05.14.09
i thought this was the united states of america. why is it when jews, who controls large portions of the media in america feel angry when someone has an opposing view. facebook should not have to succumb to jewish pressure as does many individuals and entities in america. the last 8 years the bush administration has let so called isreal commit horrific war crimes against a barely defensible palestinian peoples. to even speak on the inequalities that these people endure after the UN created country of isreal was forced upon them is taboo. as an african amrerican im hurt to see other people have to suffer, especially with my taxpayer money. embargo so called isreal for human rights
46. Ajoy | 05.14.09
The first amendment is my right to say what you don’t want to
hear.
The holocaust happened. It was bad. It should not happen again.
I believe that.
You don’t? Fine. That is your right. It is your right to preach
what you believe. It my right to argue, discuss, debate, criticize
and try to shame you for your beliefs.
It is not my right to muzzle you for your beliefs. The law is
clear.
47. Elizabeth Ely | 05.14.09
Once you declare one topic off limits, other topics make the blacklist just because someone says they’re associated.
One example is so-called AIDS “denialism.” I’ve done some work for the scientists’ group exposing various frauds in AIDS research, and I don’t personally know any “denialists” (who deny deaths) or people who equate their scientific questions with the Holocaust supposedly not existing. And I’ve been in it for 17 years. Still, the label sticks, and certain individuals who don’t want to be called to account for their fraudulent research have all the money and time in the world to keep slapping the label on us. What happens when we — or you — get kicked off Facebook for some fictional association with idiots who live in their parents’ basements collecting Nazi memorabilia and come out at night to spray-paint swastikas on synagogues? Where does the witch-hunt end?
I think Facebook’s policy of closing down groups that espouse violence is reasonable, and yes, it should apply to everyone. Beyond that, if people are denying the Holocaust on Facebook, they’re exposing their arguments to the open air. That in itself could make them more accountable. I’m not afraid of that, are you?
48. William Warren | 05.14.09
@43 Da Dubster
“Aren’t the holocaust deniers part of a bigger trend, which mostly seems to involve the political and religious right: when you can’t win an argument due to the facts not being on your side, just lie and deny.”
And Michael Moore and his ilk aren’t/don’t? The Carbon Credits and Cap ‘n Trade charade, the left politicians’ political, financial and moral corruption? C’mon, everybody’s doing it, and that’s why the only way out for Facebook is pretty much to not censor/limit anything at all.
I DO agree with your ultimate conclusion: “too many jerks in the world.”
49. William Warren | 05.14.09
44, Sitting Bull
I agree about the Native Americans.
But I don’t agree with the rest. Why is it fair to equate one politician (Bush II in your example) with maybe the very worst of his supporters (KKK in PB County) and not another? Do you recall the howls (I’m sure you do) when people tried to link our very popular presidential candidate (BO) with arguably the worst of HIS supporters (Mr. Super-developer Tony Rezko, the Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers,) to give just one example? The answer, it’s not fair. Every public figure attracts his/her share of wackos, extremists and haters.
50. Kevin | 05.14.09
free speech is one thing, having groups like ” death to arabs ” is complete and utter bull.
When should free speech incite violence? I dont see any oppression, i just see a bunch of immature jerks trying to get their jollies by slamming others because of their ethnic backgrounds?
There should be free speech, yes, but why the hell are we subjected to them? I’ve seen too many racist take their ” free speech ” to the streets, letting others know that no, we can’t work together to propel humanity; we’re going to fight each other for religious purposes and skin color.
We’re hindering ourselves by segregating ourselves, and we let it slide. We’re in the 21st century, people. Lets stop all this crap and focus on whats important; space travel and the construction of giant robots. ( thats a joke. you’re supposed to insert something productive here )~~~~>))))))>
51. Karla Winkler | 05.15.09
Hello: Whenever I read about people and politicians who are denying the Holocaust (a very interesting Freudian defense mechanism, too), I would like to ask them:
1. Would there have been a Nuerenberg Trial just put on for our amazement or amusement?
2. Would the German goverment after much whinzing so about 15 or 20 years LATER, pay WIEDERGUTMACHUNG to Jewish survivors and families??
Think!
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
1. John | 05.11.09
Thank you for being one of the few organizations to give any credit or acknowledgment to the JIDF whatsoever. Fact is, Cuban was just inspired by the JIDF in the beginning. His first article about Holocaust denial on Facebook in November largely relied upon one of their posts they wrote in October.
In fact, some even claim he plagiarized it.