Julius Streicher was convicted at Nuremberg for a reason.
From the Nuremberg trials:
"CONCLUSION. It may be that Streicher is less directly involved in the physical commission of the crimes against Jews than some of his coconspirators. The submission of the Prosecution is that his crime is no less worse for that reason. No government in the world, before the Nazis came to power, could have embarked upon and put into effect a policy of mass Jewish extermination in the way in which they did, without having a people who would back them and support them, and without having a large number of people who were prepared to carry out the murder themselves. (See Chapter XII on Persecution of the Jews.)
It was to the task of educating and poisoning the people with hate, and of producing murderers, that Streicher set himself. For 25 years he continued unrelentingly the perversion of the people and youth of Germany. He went on and on, as he saw the results of his work bearing fruit.
In the early days he was preaching persecution. As persecution took place he preached extermination and annihilation and, as millions of Jews were exterminated and annihilated, in the Ghettos of the East, he cried out for more and more.
The crime of Streicher is that he made these crimes possible, which they would never have been had it not been for him and for those like him. Without Streicher and his propaganda, the Kaltenbrunners, the Himmlers, the General Stroops would have had nobody to do their orders.
In its extent Streicher's crime is probably greater and more far-reaching than that of any of the other defendants. The misery which they caused ceased with their capture. The effects of this man's crime, of the poison that he has put into the minds of millions of young boys and girls goes on, for he concentrated upon the youth and childhood of Germany. He leaves behind him a legacy of almost a whole people poisoned with hate, sadism, and murder, and perverted by him. That people remain a problem and perhaps a menace to the rest of civilization for generations to come."
And may I also remind you that Bin Laden flew no planes on 9-11, yet he is as culpable as the ones who did, as he incited, with his fatwas (WORDS) the actions of those, and many other Islamofascist killers.
I agree that words that incite violence should not be, and in the US, are not, protected. My point goes solely to speech denying that the Holocaust occurred. THAT speech, as hateful as it is, ought to be protected. In my view, the more effective destruction of an attitude such as that shown by the writer who was arrested would be to devastate his argument with the clear proof that exists that the Holocaust did in fact occur. It is obvious that there are those who deny that occurrence, and their speech withers next to evidence of the atrocities that occurred.