Agreed. We may or may not agree with what he's written, but he has every right to write it and those who try to stop it represent a bad omen of things to come, I think.

You are all kidding right? This has nothing to do with freedom of speech. He can write and speak all he wants about his ridiculous ideas and many idiots will believe him too. This is a litmus test of how far we will go to "protect" people who are H. deniers. He broke the law of HIS land and we don't "protect" lawbreakers, we send them HOME. Denial of the H. should be illegal everywhere. How can you defend the mental illness of racism, anti-semitism, denial of pictures of one of the worst atrocities that humans are capable of? Be afraid? I'm afraid. I'm afraid of YOU!

Barbara, of *course* this is about freedom of speech.

We don't arrest people for saying the Earth is flat, or that women shouldn't have the right to vote, or that the moon landings were faked.

Nor does freedom of speech mean that any efforts by anyone to curtail such speech is a violation -- which is a mistaken belief that causes a lot of idiots to think that when folks boycott a TV show (like Glen Beck's boycott) that's a free speech violation. It isn't.

What's different here is that going after an author in this particular way (if it were successful) would truly stop that author from having any access to the fellow nutjobs who wanted to hear what he had to say. In our plasticized economy, being unable to accept all credit cards would be tantamount to an outright banning.

Freedom of speech isn't a freedom intended for we sane folks. It's there to protect the nutters. Because, after all, if we can tolerate to let them say what they say, surely we can tolerate the more reasonable things the rest of us think.

Denial of the Holocaust is deplorable, and these actions have also led to him being jailed in Austria, but last time I checked this isn't Austria. I do find his publications, and his entire concept deplorable, but I also served my country to preserve the rights of this great country of ours. It sounds to me like a dozen NY lawmakers need to be censured, or possibly removed from office for their actions, and if AMEX does maintain their stance, I'll be glad to close out my merchant account, and cancel my card. Freedom is fighting for the rights of someone whose beliefs you would would spend your life disagreeing with. Wake up people, this country was founded on something bigger than our petty personal beliefs.

"When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."
Thomas Jefferson

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
Thomas Jefferson

This is not about freedom of speech. He can write and say whatever he wants, AmEx just doesn't want their company to be associated with this nut. If the people that are buying into his deranged mindset, then they will continue to do so and pay cash. If, and I do mean If, Visa and MasterCard follow suit as AmEx, this man will not go broke and the economy will not suffer because his thoughts are not being purchased by the three major card companies.

However crazy his ideas may be, we can't have people being blacklisted for them. What happens when your ideas are deemed "radical" or "extreme" like your views on abortion or global warming or gay marriage... either side?
Will you be able to buy a hot dog in this town again?

Chino, of JuniorYChino.com a political blog

I think this is a GREAT idea and perhaps something American Express can look into further:

Neo-Nazi arm band - $19
A Skinhead rock CD - $16
A copy of Mien Kampf - $11
Getting your credit line closed and rate jacked to 79% because of your bigoted views and buying habits - priceless

I am 100% for free speech but, ladies and gentlemen, we are talking about denying the Holocaust here. In Europe, you go to jail for that kind of thing. The least was can do is cut off the American Express privileges.

This man is not being denied his constitutional rights by the US government.

He is in violation of his contract with a business (AmEx) and the contract was revoked.

Credit card businesses have a right to set their own standards for the merchants they accept and the merchant agrees to abide by the rules set down, when they sign the contract.

The right to set terms in a contract, and the right to accept the terms or not sign the contract, is also guaranteed by the constitution.

Blaming any of this on the government or 'liberals' is just hysterical over reaction....or trolling.

"Freedom of speech" in this country has to do with prohibiting the GOVERNMENT'S ability to curtail your speech. It sounds like AmEx was unaware of the nature of this guy's business (they are a huge company afterall with many, many merchant accounts). They are well within their rights to drop this guy if they feel he will damage their "brand."

If it were your business would you want to be associated with this guy?

Yes, Irving has every right to peddle his hate garbage but AmEx, as a non-government entity has every right to say, "We do not want to be asssociated with you. Goodbye."

Yes Kathy, this may have been in Austria but I thought Amex is an american company! Banks have no business regulating who continues to have credit based on religious or political beliefs. Last time I checked my Amex bill it said nothing about it could be used only in Austria. The point is, this guy could be selling his books to anyone anywhere and AMex should have stayed out of it. So if I don't agree with Obama or any other politician, they should be able to call all the banks I do business with and cancel my lines of credit and financially ruin me? That is what you are agreeing with! The last one to pull political tactics like this was Adolf Hitler and certainly, no one would agree with his methods of dealing with political decent! This is very scary indeed, that the banks have so much control over people's personal affairs!

True, but the lawmaker that started the whole campaign to get Amex to drop him is from Brooklyn, NY.

Kathy, as much as it pains you to accept, Brooklyn is part of America.

I know, I know. Sometimes we'd rather they weren't.

(It doesn't matter where he's from or what *his* laws are -- American politicians have no business attacking speech in this manner.)

And, I hate to do this, as I feel like I'm unfairly picking on you, Kathy, but actually *you* need to re-read the article. He's British. Not Austrian.

Clearly he made the mistake of visiting Austria and espousing these beliefs. I'm a bit surprised someone with such a retarded worldview as he has managed to travel so far -- shouldn't he have been worried that the odd mechanical contraption would fall from the sky if it attempted to fly? Or that he, himself, might fall over the edge of the earth if he journeyed too far?

Again, American politicians have no business attempting to block an author from market. Would you also side with an American lawmaker if they attempted to ban Salmon Rushdie from selling his books for violating Islamic law?

Elizabeth, there is a huge difference in people choosing not to support the Dixie Chicks because of their stupid comments and this case with AmEx.

This would be similar in AmEx refused to let Dixie Chicks accept AmEx credit cards to buy her album because of what they said.

Do you want banks deciding when to lend you money (and that is what a credit card is - an extension of credit) based on your political beliefs?