For some people, Arjay, I'm sure he does.

>>Dr Paul Craig Roberts ( ex -assistant secretary to the US Treasury) says ISIS is a creation of Washington. He has far more credibility than yourself.<<

But fortunately, there is still a large majority who know an egotistical, anti-semitic, white-supremacist, self-promoting flake when they see one.

I notice that you have no comment to make on the contradiction inherent in fiction writer Dee McLachlan's observations on the 9/11 "explosions". But I guess that would mean using your own brain, wouldn't it Arjay, instead of your usual process of simply cut'n'pasting some other conspiracy nut-job's online ravings.

david f, you said: "In English common law, incitement and harassment are illegal"
Graham wasn't charged with incitement and harassment, the police evidently had no grounds, therefore you have no grounds for that accusation. He was himself the victim of severe harassment.
Graham's case is watertight, based with pure logic on a universally-accepted charter of human rights which does not include a right to kill. You have no answer, so you invent a fictitious crime. Is that the best you can manage?

Dear Peter D,

I didn't write that Graham was charged with incitement and harassment. I maintained that what he called free speech was the right to harass women going to an abortion clinic. The limits set for him to approach the clinic was to protect women from harassment. Graham would like the freedom to harass already stressed women. He doesn't like the laws that protect women from harassment and claims his free speech is restricted. However, he has apparently obeyed those laws even though he doesn't like them.

david f, I never claimed that you wrote "that Graham was charged with incitement and harassment" - I stated the exact opposite, namely that it is you alone who have made that unjust accusation. Are you incapable of understanding the written word?
It is you alone who made the charge of harassment and incitement, and you alone who must own those words. My point, clearly understandable to any person of reasonable intelligence, was that, since police DID NOT lay any such charges, your accusation was therefore groundless.
If you are going to enter this debate, the first requirement is that you take responsibility for your own written words, don't try verballing me. That's not honest.

Well said and well done, Graham! A point well made.

Clear and penetrating.

Some laws were made to be broken.

Dear Peter D,

The accusation I made was that GP wants the freedom to harass women who go to an abortion clinic. I stand by that accusation.