Dear SPQR,

Please read the link that I gave on Dr Munjed Al Muderis
(he's not the war hero - but he helped quite a few).
You'll get the point once you read the article.

As for Banjo's reference to "New Matilda," none of the
links I've cited are taken from "New Matilda," so Banjo
is simply stirring - ( i.e. - stoning - using popcorn).
Thought you'd like that!

Paul,

The sort of situation you discuss is already covered by laws related to defamation

"Similar to defamation is public disclosure of private facts, which arises where one person reveals information that is not of public concern, and the release of which would offend a reasonable person. 'Unlike [with] libel, truth is not a defense for invasion of privacy.'[3][not verified in body]. False light laws protect against statements which are not technically false but misleading.[4]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation

Your scenario implies not just bad manners and a breach of trust (plus a strong possibility that your neighbours would think even less of you than of him), but could actually lay you open to legal action. This is not the same as the sorts of cases that we have been discussing here.

Both Foxy and Paul are ridiculous.

Foxy wants free speech, but it can't be unfettered. And Paul only wants free speech if it complies to social norms.

The term Oxymoron springs to mind. Free speech by definition is unfettered and does not have to comply to social norms.

The proposed changes to 18c removes the subjective requirements for the "victim" to be insulted, offended, or humiliated, and added the objective requirement for offender to vilify or intimidate. This enables someone to express their opinion, but not through their words deliberately try to harm someone.

Hi Paul,

Divergence got in first :) Defamation and libel laws are already in place. As well, creating a public nuisance might cover that hypothetical.

And if you tried it, I'm reasonably sure that your other neighbours would shun you as a trouble-maker, especially if they were friends with your neighbour. You might find all sorts of things stuffed into your own letter-box ;)

Joe

YEBIGA "Europeans had entirely neutralised any threat from the Muslim world prior to the formation of the United States of America"

And they did that how?
With conferences and pretty propaganda?
No, with weapons, with war, with expulsion.

We resisted them with our imperial power, but what's happened to our empires?
What's our policy now? Resistance and rejection?
No, welcome mat, open door.

They don't need to plan invasions anymore.
We're letting them in.

You are ignoring the radicalisation that's happened in recent decades.
Muslims today are not the Muslims of 1900 or 1800.
You only need to watch the news to see it.

Foxy, my comments are very well-reasoned.
And I doubt you've ever addressed a single point I've ever made.

All you do is copy-paste official propaganda and MSM.

Where is your well-reasoned argument, *justifying* an immigration policy totally at odds with our history (now 80% non-White), that will result in our stealth genocide?

Dear Shocker,

To tell you the truth - I don't always read
everything you write. Not being contentious here -
but most of it I find rather nonsensical. No offence
intended.

You stereotype people - and yet you yourself fit
right in to a stereotype of your own - the irony of
which is lost on you. Never mind. You can't help it.
I realise that. Sadly - things won't change for people
like you. You have a one track mind - and it's not
going anywhere. However, the rest of the country will survive
and prosper despite you. And in that we can all take comfort.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-08/raja-we-must-recognise-racism-in-order-to-end-it/5189972