Uhhh....how? The fact that a privately owned company doesnt want to play music from people with views they dont agree with = censorship? You are really equating that with government censorship?

I know that Germany makes owning Nazi-related stuff illegal. Oh....they just happen to be European as well. I am sure it is just a coincidence.

Let them. Freedom of Speech only applies to people who agree with you?

Define "milder".

Except that there were no knives in this case...only words.

I do. See my comment above about Germany. It aint just Sweden.

You mean like the fact that it exists? heh heh

If you cant express any idea you want, it is not really free speech now is it?

A direct threat is different from free speech. You dont see a difference?

Direct threat example: "If you cross this line I will kill you."

Free Speech example: "God commands that homosexuals should be put to death."

This all seems obvious to me. But like I said...the idea of free speech seems foreign to you people.

LOL, you just cant help yourself

No, there is a very fine line between an idiot (hate-filled illogical non-sensical bigot) standing on a podium preaching his hate, and one of his listeners taking it further and carrying out his 'ideas'.

If minority victimization can be nipped in the bud by taking out the messenger, I'm all for it.

If Hitler had been 'nipped in the bud' and forced to stop practicing his hate before he turned to direct threats and Brown shirts..............but you stick to your nutters in Aryan only communities chewing tobacco and threatening to nuke 'dem der blackies', your choice.

__________________
"The key to immortality is living a life worth remembering"

Just dont pretend you people are for free speech when you obviously are not. You are only for free speech as long as it doesnt offend you too much...

'You people'? Do stop SS, you're becoming quite a parody. You people are always so funny.

I dont offend in the least, I'm a Policeman for God sake, but if extremist speakers\hate mongerers can be curbed therefore grinding down access to this filth, thus reducing extreme activism aka terrorism, then why not?

Freedom of speech re: foxhunting\abortion\war\immigration\whatever is topical, is very healthy and good for the community. EXTREME Freedom of speech resulting in victimisation of minority groups is very very wrong.

__________________
"The key to immortality is living a life worth remembering"

Thank God we have something called the first ammendment where people can say what they feel without fear of being jailed. You talk of the SS, it sounds like Sweden is on its way to becoming the next Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia where people have to be afraid to speak their mind.

What Sweden or Germany do is irrelevant, they're different countries, a point you people seem to consistently forget. Europe is a continent encompassing many countries. America is a continent encompassing many countries. When Germany does something you dont like, you guys all blame collective Europe. When Canada does something we dont like, is it fair we all blame collective America?

Its simple Geography, honestly

Rebellion, people SHOULD be allowed to say what they feel, I quite agree, I have helped police protests that I dont agree with, its a healthy part of life. My problem is the Adolf Hitlers\Bin Ladens on podiums being allowed to spew their BS to the generally gullible masses, keeping the circle of hate and violence alive and resulting in the deaths of innocents

__________________
"The key to immortality is living a life worth remembering"

[quote]It's not fair, although when people say Europe they aren't speaking about Sweden, Finland, Luxembourg, etc. They say that because Germany and France have tried so hard through the media to identify themselves as the economic and cultural centers of Europe that it has worked. So people use the word Europe to reflect 2-3 countries. So while it's not fair they also aren't speaking about all Euro countries either.

People have religous beliefs, your attempts to quash those beliefs are a slippery slope. What's next? Jailing people for speaking out against other forms of immorality? Jailing someone who speaks out against thieves because he believes it's wrong because of his religous beliefs? Sounds like you're heading in that direction.

Except that "Hate Speech" laws are defined so vaguely, that anything you dont like can be defined as hate speech. You people think you can legislate ideas out of existence...it seems very naive IMO.

Define "extreme" in this context.

Yet here you are, defending their assinine law. You may be different nations, but you all think the same way. Your very post supports my point.

There is no Continent called "America". I believe you mean "North America".

Heh heh, and you people say our education is lacking.

In one sentence you say people should be allowed to say what they feel, and in the very next sentence you say in effect "unless it is too offensive". Spare me.

France the cultural centre of Europe..... yeah right.

No. My point is the level of extremism involved and the incitement level. Someone saying 'i dont like thieves' isn't having the same affect as someone, e.g. a local American based version of Bin Laden, having the 'Freedom of Speech' to say 'We hate all Infidels and should revolt', or one of your Aryan Brotherhood boys having the 'Freedom of Speech' to say 'I have a lovely lampshade made out of dead jews but they enjoyed being killed'. It's sick, and unnecessary in any modern society.
Freedom of speech is about having your own opinion on a contentious matter and having the right to voice it, not about furthering your vitriol and using the masses as a wind-up toy to victimize innocent people.

SS, collectively, South America, North America = America. North, South, whatever. Dear God, pedantic beyond belief

__________________
"The key to immortality is living a life worth remembering"

Is that so?

Well now I've haered it all. You guys don't even allow the f-word on tv or radio (and you invented it).

__________________
They know... Saddam Hussein is no threat to the US. But at some point he might decide if he had a nuclear weapon to use it against Israel. Gen.W.Clark