There is an extremely high likelihood that the applicant would exhibit the same sort of language and behavior that it has in the past. The decision to deny permission to use the park was made based on

Bravo, Kawasaki!

Fantastic. I hope that sets a precedent.

So what is this group? Related to Sakura?

Mayor did the right thing.

Excellent news! Thank you Mr Fukuda! My hat off to you sir! What you did took guts and courage. And I for one applaud you.

Change is often frustratingly slow here in Japan, but BRAVO!

Well done Mayor Fukuda. Let's hope he doesn't get shot in the back for his bravery.

we must protect the safety and dignity of city residents from wrongful discriminatory speech and behavior.

Fukuda is protecting the wrongful discriminatory speech and behavor of Koreans and Chinese against the Japanese. The Koreans are already too powerful in Japan.

tinawatanabe said

Fukuda is protecting the wrongful discriminatory speech and behavor of Koreans and Chinese against the Japanese. Are you suggesting that hate speech has varying levels of "wrongness" depending on who is saying it and where?

Are you suggesting that hate speech has varying levels of "wrongness" depending on who is saying it and where?

Japan's Hate speech law is designed to regulates only the Japanese against the Korean not vice versa. Japan is really being broken.

If the Japan that is being "broken" is the "beautiful Japan" that xenophobes, racists, and narrow minded backwards people espouse, Tina..... that's a good thing. That "Japan" is an anchor and a drag on a country that could be a wonderful place.

Sounds like a bad idea to me. The only thing I think that should be regulated, and that I believe isn't an abrogation of expression, are decibel levels. When we tolerate speech we detest, we protect our own rights and the right to have unpopular views. I don't like a bunch of noise all the time. That should be strictly curtailed. But, I don't believe it's a good idea to restrict demonstrations based on the anticipated speech. Another exception is incitement.

Sounds like a bad idea to me. The only thing I think that should be regulated, and that I believe isn't an abrogation of expression, are decibel levels. When we tolerate speech we detest, we protect our own rights and the right to have unpopular views

Certain politicians in Germany in the 1930's and 40's made a lot of hate speeches. Are you saying that was and is acceptable?

I agree that tolerating speech we detest is important for civil discourse. There's a difference, though, between engaging in civil discourse and having a hate demonstration. The latter is meant to terrorize a minority population into moving out of town -- but would likely intimidate or disturb a lot of other folks into leaving the area as well.