Re: Free speech or hate speech?
 

Neither should be jailed.

Re: Free speech or hate speech?
 

Certainly the Saudi Arabian man should not be jailed, he should be given a medal!

Re: Free speech or hate speech?
 

But you cant have it both ways. Thats the rub with freedom of speech.

At this point most frothing D-M readers are probably wondering why the magistrate didnt have the poor twit flogged too...

Re: Free speech or hate speech?
 

I don't think it's having it both ways. It's the content which differentiates the speech. The problem here (for commentators) is that we don't know exactly what was tweeted.

Re: Free speech or hate speech?
 

The judge did, and he was jailed for being offensive, not for making threats.

Re: Free speech or hate speech?
 

Speech is either free or its not. If you are going to make legal judgments based on the offensiveness of the content, then its not free. Im sure some Saudi observers find Raif Badawis comments offensive to their strict muslim sensibilities after all.

Re: Free speech or hate speech?
 

Fine. We don't need it to be completely free.

Re: Free speech or hate speech?
 

I may be wrong but it seems like you are saying. That if you agree with someones point then they have the right to express it. if not, porridge.

Re: Free speech or hate speech?
 

As long as people dont deem your comments to be offensive though, right?

And then who gets to decide on what is/isnt offensive?

Re: Free speech or hate speech?
 

You have to differentiate between offensive comments and threats. The Westboro Baptist Church make offensive comments, but they don't make threats. As soon as you say "I" or "We" are going to kill, it becomes a threat. Such threats intimidate people and are crimes.

Re: Free speech or hate speech?
 

We’re agreed on that, but he didn’t threaten to kill anyone.
He said “I’d have killed them all”. Past tense. Hypothetical.
It’s not the same as “I’m going to kill them all”.

Re: Free speech or hate speech?
 

Is that the exact tweet? Where did you see it reported?

Re: Free speech or hate speech?
 

I think it's all quite alarming.

We are now deemed capable of being offended by people we may never have met posting things we may never have read.

Don't get me wrong, only a fool would put into print some of the more outrageous comments we all make from time to time, but showing yourself up to be a fool should not be a criminal offence.

Re: Free speech or hate speech?
 

But 100 years before the US bill of rights was ratified which was 1791, the US was not an independent country.

Re: Free speech or hate speech?
 

Granted but my point was that we already have one. The US copied Britain in this respect, we don't need to copy them.