Yes TrashcanMan and Steven,

The reason it makes me physically ill to even think about defending Bolt in any way, is that I certainly suspect that he would be one of those coming for me...

Bugsy wrote:

>>The reason it makes me physically ill to even think about defending Bolt in any way, is that I certainly suspect that he would be one of those coming for me...>>

And the communists would have come for Niemoller and for me.

Defending free speech means defending the rights of people like Sheikh Hilaly who is quoted as saying:

>>"The Jews' struggle with humanity is as old as history itself; the present continuing struggle with the Islam nation is a natural continuation of the Jews' enmity towards the human race as a whole. Judaism controls the world by...secret movements …The Jews try to control the world through sex, then sexual perversion, then the promotion of espionage, treason, and economic hoarding.">>

It means defending the rights of Muslims to preach:

"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews
(killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The
stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdullah, there is a Jew behind me,
come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (a certain kind of
tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the
Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Muslim).

TrashcanMan wrote:

>>However, emotional or psychological abuse, denigration etc can cause much more harm, long term, than can a few punches to the head. Especially for young people growing up and trying to fit in.>>

Once we go down the road of allowing people’s hurt feelings to become a reason to restrict speech then free speech will be dead. Well-funded grievance-mongering lobby groups will employ lawyers to silence critics – a practice known as lawfare.

There are no free lunches. Trade-offs are inevitable. Part of the price you pay for living in a free society is that you have to see and hear stuff that offends you.

And some people are very easily offended. Among the easiest to offend are my fellow Jews and Muslims. Both have well funded lobby groups able to employ really smart, and expensive, lawyers. Don’t give them an opening

The Cronulla riots, a perfect example of healthy freedom of speech from responsible media contributing to a better world

I read with great interest Dr. Mangalwadi's column "Liberating the Media from Law's Bondage." To think that "freedom of speech" could be so easily infringed, especially in a great country like Australia, is frightening. I should be thankful that it could not happen here in the United States, right?

But it does! In fact, only a few minutes before I read Dr. Mangalwadi's piece I read an article written by Mark Hemmingway that posted on October 4 on The Weekly Standard's website. It shows that the problem not only exists here, but is very likely much worse, for the intimidation of CBS News investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson related to the growing "Fast and Furious" scandal would appear to be more severe. Worse yet, it looks as if management at CBS in on-board with this injustice. Worst of all, it is reported to come directly from both the White House and the Justice Department. This is deeply disturbing and calls to mind the Fascism of Mussolini's Italy in the 1930s.

Read the article at this link . . .

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/cbs-news-reporter-says-white-house-screamed-swore-her-over-fast-and-furious_595011.html

From the story linked to above:"In between the yelling that I received from Justice Department yesterday, the spokeswoman--who would not put anything in writing, I was asking for her explanation so there would be clarity and no confusion later over what had been said, she wouldn't put anything in writing"

I've encountered this sort of "screaming" and lack of willingness to commit things to print from women functionaries before. It's the standard mode of operation of the CSA and I've also encountered it in other women in government jobs when they don't like the questions being asked. I've been hung up on by women working for the Brisbane City Council for asking for advice on how to submit a plumbing application. I got interrupted to be told "hire a plumber", before the "clunk". When I rang back I simply asked to be transferred to a supervisor, who was quite helpful, but I didn't mention the previous call.

It also ties in quite well with the data that shows most bullying complaints are received from women about women.

Bugsy,

TrashcanMan

Incitement to violence, NARROWLY DEFINED, is not the same as comment.

I would say that, in the Cronulla case, there was clear incitement to violence. There could and should have been prosecutions under such laws just as the Eatock 9 could have pursued Bolt for defamation.

Therefore your comments about Cronulla are besides the point.

What you all seem to be forgetting is how easy it would be to INTIMIDATE small publications (like Online Opinion) using laws that make it an offence to cause offence.

It takes an expensive lawyer to defend yourself against an expensive lawyer. Many small publications (like Online Opinion) cannot afford to defend themselves. They would have to fold or exercise strict censorship.

Just to be clear, based on comments I have seen about Jews on Online Opinion I could probably make life very difficult for Graham. All I would have to do is write a letter to the Anti Defamation League in Australia with some choice quotes from certain posters and Graham would be in a world of legal pain.

Now I am not going to do anything of the sort. But how does Graham know that somebody else won't?

Do you really want to give the "easily offended" that sort of power?