Is This What They Call the ‘Cream of the Crop’?
WATCH GUARDIAN VIDEO: Free speech debate sparks protests
Mark Alexander

Irving and Griffin Spark Fury at Oxford Union Debate
Photo courtesy of The Guardian
It is to be noted that the people demonstrating against free speech at the Oxford Union were trying to take our liberties away from us all by intimidation. They forget that millions of people have died for this cherished freedom as recently as the last century. These demonstrators are naïve in the extreme, and totally without understanding.

Just because we find someone else’s views offensive - and David Irvings’s views on the Holocaust most certainly are – this does not mean to say that that person should have no right to express them.

Those demonstrators wanted to close down all that we Britons have held dear for so long. Many of those demonstrating have surely come to this country from abroad. They have probably fled tyranny themselves. Now they want to impose their own tyranny and restrictions on us!

It is also to be noted that there were banners displayed in those demonstrations in favour of a “multicultural” Britain. One can but wonder if these same demonstrators realise how little multiculturalism there will be in the United Islamic Kingdom!

These people are supposed to be intelligent. Intelligence is usually accompanied by insight and foresight. As far as I can see, they have shown themselves to have very little insight, foresight or understanding of what living in a free society means. Free means free for ALL people, not just free for students who worship at the altar of multiculturalism. There are other people out there with different views, and their views should be heard. Remember Voltaire’s words of wisdom: ”I disapprove of what you say, but I shall defend to the death your right to say it.” Voltaire must be turning in his grave! - ©Mark

· Demonstrators breach security cordon
· Speakers forced to address audience separately

THE GUARDIAN: A debate on free speech at the Oxford Union descended into chaos last night after scores of demonstrators broke through a security cordon and staged a sit-down protest in the union's famous chamber.

Scuffles broke out in the hall as the demonstrators - there to voice their opposition to the presence of discredited historian David Irving and BNP leader Nick Griffin - clashed with organisers and security guards.

Order was eventually restored and the event went ahead with Griffin and Irving forced to speak in separate rooms as hundreds of students and anti-fascist campaigners surrounded the venue chanting and singing.

During his speech Griffin described the protesters as a "mob which would kill".

"I have seen them beat old men and women who are wearing war medals and try and kill them. Had they grown up in Nazi Germany they would have been splendid Nazis."

During his speech Irving said he would not be bowed. "I am not going to write what they want me to write. I am going to write what I find in the archives."

At the end of the event Union president Luke Tryl, who had invited Griffin and Irving, said his only regret was that some people had been intimidated. "At the end of that David Irving came out looking pathetic ... I said in my introduction that I found his views repugnant and abhorrent because I wanted that on record ... I think the principle has been proved," said Tryl.

The meeting was disrupted again when Peter Simpson, a student who had travelled from Essex, heckled Griffin from the floor. Afterwards Simpson said: "I cannot believe people will sit in a room and listen to him spout his despicable ideology." >> By Alexandra Topping

The Oxford Union

THE SPECTATOR:
My Comment

Mark Alexander

Oxford Debate Delayed by Protest
BBC: A debate at the Oxford Union has begun after being delayed when protesters forced their way into the building.

BNP leader Nick Griffin and controversial historian David Irving were invited to talk about free speech.

Thirty protesters pushed their way into the hall to stage a sit-down protest at the debating table.

Earlier, 500 people staged a sit-down demonstration outside the gates of the building, preventing about half the students due to attend from getting in.

Anti-racism campaigners said the two men should not be given a platform to speak at the debate in St Michael's Street, Oxford.

Protesters chanted anti-fascist slogans and jeered "shame on you".

The students broke through a security cordon into the building where the debate, scheduled to start at 2030 GMT was delayed.

Union security officers said the protesters got into the building by jumping over the wall while others created a diversion by gathering and crushing at the front gate. >>

WATCH BBC VIDEO:
Students against fee speech

THE TELEGRAPH:
Protesters break into Oxford Union debate By Ben Farmer in Oxford

THE TELEGRAPH:
Context should not affect free speech

TIMESONLINE:
Rival students clash as Holocaust denier turns up for Oxford debate

Mark Alexander

Turning Free Speech into a Negotiable Commodity
SP!KED: ‘Why make a big deal about free speech?’ a student asked me after one of my lectures recently. Such a cynical attitude towards the principle of free speech is common today. An army of self-selected censors is currently demanding: ‘How dare the Oxford Union invite Nick Griffin, leader of the British National Party, and the anti-Semitic historian David Irving to participate in one of its debates?’ The fevered response to tonight’s debate on free speech and extremism at the Oxford Union highlights the exhaustion of a genuine democratic commitment to freedom of expression. If there is one powerful argument in favour of holding the debate, it is as a way of countering this illiberal outlook.

There was a time when those who called themselves radical or progressive marched and struggled for the realisation of the right to freedom of speech. These days, so-called progressives are far more likely to demonstrate against the right of people that they don’t like to speak openly. They demand the censorship of public expressions of extremist views. Mainstream public figures and officials embrace the role of the censor, and proclaim that freedom of speech is not an ‘absolute right’. In an era that finds it difficult to uphold any absolutes – absolute truth, absolute good – the devaluation of speech from an absolute freedom to a conditional one fits in well with the prevailing ‘common sense’. However, once a right ceases to be an ‘absolute’, it becomes a negotiable commodity. Devaluing the freedom of speech so that it becomes a relative right (in other words, a privilege) simply means upholding the right to speak of those whom we like, and censoring the views of people we find obnoxious or offensive.

The censorious response to the Oxford Union debate comes at a time when attacks on freedom of speech are being widely institutionalised. In recent years, numerous laws have been introduced to punish various forms of speech as ‘incitement to religious hatred’, ‘glorifying terrorism’ or ‘expressing homophobic views’. The New Labour government is set to launch a new crusade against the expression of extremist views on university campuses. Such illiberal attitudes are not confined to Labour. Julian Lewis, the Tory shadow defence secretary, sought to capture the limelight with his very public resignation from the Oxford Union over the Irving/Griffin debate. Of course, Lewis informed us, he is not against free speech – well, he is not absolutely against it. ‘I think there are people who are confusing this with an issue of free speech’, he said. In fact, there is no confusion here; this is a free speech issue. >> By Frank Furedi

Mark Alexander

The Limits to Freedom of Speech
Freedom of speech is indivisible: Either you have it, or you don’t. Period! It cannot be limited without losing freedom of speech altogether. And in any case, once you start saying that this or that cannot be said, then who is to decide what is seemly? If we start limiting our freedom of expression in this manner, we will soon be on a slippery slope: We might well find ourselves in a situation as has happened in Khartoum just recently, a situation in which a teacher has been arrested for allowing her classroom children to call a teddy bear Muhammad. That poor young lady has been arrested for blasphemy!

BBC: The debate at the Oxford Union featuring BNP leader Nick Griffin and historian David Irving highlights fundamental questions about the limits to free speech.

Some protestors called for the debate to be cancelled, both because it might offend people and because it could stir up racial hatred.

But there are others who think people should be allowed to say whatever they think - regardless of the offence it might cause, and even if there is a potential threat to public order.

For some anti-fascist campaigners like Donna Guthrie, the fact that David Irving's views are offensive to large numbers of people is enough to prevent him from speaking.

'Racial attacks'

"Irving is a Holocaust denier, and giving him a platform is an insult to the millions who were murdered by the Nazis."

Ms Guthrie - National Campaigner for the group Unite Against Fascism - said there had also been a rise in racial attacks whenever Nick Griffin's BNP party gained seats on local councils.

She added: "Free speech is not uncontrolled. Speech does not happen in a vacuum. We know that when a fascist organisation speaks, there are real consequences."

In Britain there are laws protecting our right to free speech. But they are so hedged with qualifications that there is still plenty of room for arguments. >> By Julian Joyce

Mark Alexander

Protest Expected at Oxford Debate
"The measure of our country's respect for free expression is our willingness to allow it for the most objectionable and offensive lawful speech" - Evan Harris, Liberal Democrat MP

BBC: Protests are expected later outside the Oxford Union when two controversial figures arrive for a free speech event.

Nick Griffin, leader of the British National Party, and David Irving - jailed for denying the Holocaust - are to take part in an Oxford Union debate.

Their inclusion has led to objections from student groups and MP Dr Julian Lewis has resigned his membership of the debating union in protest.

The Oxford Union says it is important to give people of all views a platform.

A rally against the inclusion of the two men was held last week with speakers including Holocaust survivors.

The decision to give Mr Griffin and Mr Irving a platform has also been condemned by the president of the Oxford Student Union and race equalities watchdog Trevor Phillips.

Mr Griffin has repeatedly insisted the BNP is not a racist group. >>

LISTEN TO BBC AUDIO:
Free speech debate ‘theatre’?

Mark Alexander

MP Quits Union Over BNP Speaker
Photo of Dr Lewis who resigned from the Oxford Union Debating Society courtesy of the BBC
The president of the Oxford Union Debating Society has defended an invitation to the British National Party leader and a controversial historian.

BBC: A Tory MP has resigned from The Oxford Union in protest at its decision to invite two controversial figures to a free speech event on Monday.

Nick Griffin, leader of the British National Party (BNP) and David Irving - jailed for denying the Holocaust - were invited by the union debating society.

Shadow defence minister and MP for New Forest East Dr Julian Lewis said the students should be "ashamed".

The Oxford Union said it was important to give people of all views a platform.

Mr Griffin has repeatedly insisted the BNP is not a racist group. >>

WATCH BBC VIDEOS:
Oxford students in BNP debate

Oxford debate is ‘worrying’

Mark Alexander

Row as Oxford Union Votes to Hear Irving
THE GUARDIAN: The Oxford Union was accused last night of 'promoting anti-Semitism' after students voted to allow Holocaust revisionist David Irving and the leader of the British National Party, Nick Griffin, to address students tomorrow.

Members of the Oxford Union Debating Society voted by a margin of two to one in favour of permitting the two right-wing figures to speak at a free-speech event, despite demands that they be banned.

The decision provoked an immediate backlash. Former Europe minister Denis MacShane condemned the union for 'promoting anti-Semitism', while the university's Muslim and Jewish societies said that principles of freedom of speech were 'overshadowed in this instance'.

The union's president, Luke Tryl, defended the invitation by arguing that the pair were not being granted a platform to expound their views, but would discuss the limits of free speech. >>

Mark Alexander

BNP to Speak to Oxford Students
Photo of Nick Griffin and David Irving courtesy of the BBC
BBC: The Oxford Union has voted to let the British National Party (BNP) leader and a controversial historian speak at a free speech event on Monday.

Despite opposition, the Oxford Union Debating Society members voted by a margin of 2 to 1 to continue to extend an invite to the BNP's Nick Griffin.

David Irving, who was jailed for Holocaust denial, will also be invited.

The move was opposed by the Oxford Student Union and the university's Muslim and Jewish societies.

The Oxford Union Debating Society said it was important to give people of all views a platform. >>

Mark Alexander