Dear Bazz,

I was hoping that you'd come into this
discussion and share your knowledge with us.
Thank You.

Dear Hassie,

It's an occupational habit to present various
perspectives in a discussion. It does not necessarily
mean that I agree with them all. I simply am trying to broaden
the discussion because I've been raised to look
at things from more than just one viewpoint.

You don't have to agree with what's being posted - or read
it for that matter if it offends you. But name-calling does
not do you any credit and lowers the bar. I expect more
from you.

Foxie to 'Hassie', 'Here, I've got a readymade (spin) off the rack for you'. 'And only used for the umpteenth time, so off you go'. Dusts hands (unnecessarily) and walks away.

Foxy,

I agree with Hasbeen; there is not much point in referring to sites and opinions that people you are addressing are never going to accept. You say, look at what this person says, but that person's opinions have already been rejected via the post of the person you are aiming at. Nobody who is a conservative is going to be swayed by what some leftie thinks, and vice versa. In my time on OLO, I have not been aware of one person who has changed his or her views on anything. The only people likely to be persuaded do not post their opinions here.

Dear ttbn,

Thank You for your civility. It is appreciated.
However my aim was not to change anyone's opinion.
I'm not in the habit of trying to convert anyone.
That is not my job. Never has been. However as an
educator - my position is to present other viewpoints
to consider and possibly broaden perspectives.
That is one of the things that I like about this Forum -
it presents us with so many different and varying
points of view. And Hassie has always been a gentleman
and I think he knows me well enough by now to know
where I'm coming from.

Just a couple of observations, useful or not.

First, if a lie or 'factoid' is not challenged it becomes the truth.

Second, the fight for freedom of speech, for freedom, is never over. Those with a memory of what was, before political correctness, are valuable in the debate.

I posted this story,

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40710165
Richard Dawkins' Berkeley event cancelled for 'Islamophobia'

.. in a thread on another matter where even Dawkins, a world-class academic known for his fearless independence, scientific rigour and respectful politeness too, is being censored, not by the university that has a duty of care, but by zealots who now seem to count in their hundreds.

They succeeded by threatening social disturbance to censor Dawkins. Next, please?

But in reality the real zealots are probably just a dozen or so thugs acting for nameless others - who should be identified by the authorities and media but never are.

Speaking of Australia, there is reason to believe that the same tactics are being used here. The scheduled visit to NZ and Australia of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, an academically bright, respectful and polite young woman with heaps of credibility, was cancelled by protesters threatening the same. The idiotic ABC that can't stop shoe throwers was no real help (to her).

http://www.sbs.com.au/yourlanguage/arabic/en/article/2017/03/20/muslim-women-protest-australian-visit-anti-islam-activist-ayaan-hirsi-ali

So roll over and allow it to happen, or dig the toes in and say B.S.? Your choice.

It amuses me greatly that those who rant and rave the loudest
for freedom of speech are the very ones who try to
silence views that don't agree with their viewpoints
using the usual techniques of mud-slinging, insults,
and nasty personal attacks.