The ideal and limits of free speech and expression, and also the free access to information, as well as the various legal and extra-legal attempts at limiting that civil right. Censorship includes not only government actions against any media, published or not, but also the active suppression of such media by mainstream outlets. Unless a report is on free speech and/or censorship in general, it has been categorized in the subcategory of the country discussed.
By Jett Rucker ∙ March 16, 2014
For much of recent history much has been written, and read, of the “blood libel” on the Jewish people spread among the populaces of Europe and the countries elsewhere populated by Europeans. The story has countless variants, most of them involving the abduction of non-Jewish babies for ritual slaughter in which some use or other…
By Nigel Jackson ∙ February 23, 2014
Richard Widmann has followed Robert Faurisson in warning that the immediate future for historical revisionists, especially those addressing the currently accepted and widely promoted view of ‘the Holocaust’, looks very bleak.[1] He has correctly observed that the world has already seen a wide range of modes of persecution inflicted on revisionists: censorship, imprisonment, intimidation, deportation,…
By Richard A. Widmann ∙ July 1, 2013
In 1966, Harry Elmer Barnes declared, “During the last 40 years, revisionism has become a controversial term.”[1] In the nearly 50 years since, “revisionism” has shifted from controversial to a purely negative term, at least in the eyes of the general public. Today “revisionism” has become synonymous with telling lies or distorting the truth with…
By Nigel Jackson ∙ October 1, 2013
Background: On 20 May 2013 our national newspaper The Australian carried a news report headed “Labor MPs to back PM on anti-Semitism.” It included the following information: “NSW Labor MPs will use this week’s parliamentary sittings for a mass signing of the London Declaration on Combating Anti-Semitism. The Prime Minister became the first Australian leader…
By Richard A. Widmann ∙ October 1, 2013
This summer, Democratic Assemblyman from Brooklyn, New York Dov Hikind launched a misguided assault against Inconvenient History and several other publishers who carry among other things Holocaust revisionist articles and commentary. Hikind is attempting to financially hamstring several organizations by arranging a vendor boycott of sorts in which major credit card companies are bullied or…
By Richard A. Widmann ∙ December 1, 2013
Friends have recently asked me to consider what I think the future holds for historical revisionism, especially that of the Second World War and even more specifically that most contentious of sub-genres, that of the Holocaust. While I generally tend to avoid futurology, I believe in this case a look forward based on the events…
By Joseph P. Bellinger ∙ December 1, 2013
At the present time, there are no “Holocaust denial” laws in the United States of America, although attempts have been repeatedly made behind the scenes by Jewish organizations and individuals to try and penalize “deniers” by various means. When one ventures into the arena of “Holocaust denial,” unpleasant consequences invariably ensue. Against those whose opinions…
By Kerry R. Bolton ∙ July 1, 2012
Whether the received wisdom on an historical event can be subjected to scholarly scrutiny depends upon the method by which the subject is utilized by entrenched interests. Hence, let the scholar or student who embarks on the questioning of certain sacred cows beware lest he be damned for heresy. This essay examines a polemical technique…
By Daniel Mcgowan ∙ April 1, 2012
The term ritual defamation was coined by Laird Wilcox to describe the destruction of the reputation of a person by unfair, wrongful, or malicious speech or publication. The defamation is in retaliation for opinions expressed by the victim, with the intention of silencing that person’s influence, and making an example of him so as to discourage…
By Richard A. Widmann ∙ April 1, 2012
On Wednesday December 28th, Print-on-Demand publisher Lulu.com informed the staff at Inconvenient History that they had struck our two annual editions from availability. The so-called “Questionable Content team” briefly noted that our content was in violation of their membership agreement because it was “unlawful, obscene, defamatory, pornographic, indecent, lewd, harassing, threatening, harmful, invasive of privacy…
End of content
End of content
