I have devoted my professional career to defending free speech, even of the speech of those whose views I despise. This has brought me into conflict, even with some close friends and colleagues with whom I agree on most other subjects. For example, I have debated Irwin Cotler on several occasions with regard to hate crimes, group defamation, Holocaust denial and advocacy of violence. I believe that all of these despicable forms of expression should be protected. In my recent book, Finding Jefferson, I present arguments for why censorship laws are generally more dangerous than the speech they seek to censor.
Yet I am here today calling for the criminalization of incitement to genocide, as practised by the Iranian regime in general and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in particular. Is there not a conflict between my lifelong defence of free speech and my support for treating Ahmadinejad as an international criminal? Let me explain why there is not, and indeed why my support for a maximalist view for free speech actually provides an important justification for indicting Ahmadinejad and his government for incitement to genocide. http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=34905