Two quotes of the day for today. One from a source that I’ve come to expect will support freedom of speech whilst the other is from a source that I found which is one that I would not expect to have seen supporting freedom of speech.

The first is from Paul Embery who said:

I broadly support Mr Embery’s viewpoint on this. I see lots of stuff that offends me every day but that doesn’t mean that I want to or believe that I should have the right to silence those with a different viewpoint. I believe that with the exception of someone who is credibly inciting immediate violence to either persons or property, then people should be allowed to say any damned thing they want. I want the lunatics of Islam, the far right and the far left to be able to speak freely even though I vehemently disagree with them. I hold this view partly because I want that right to speak freely for myself, but also because those who follow these paths are enemies of mine and I want to be able to know what my enemy is thinking, saying or plotting.

The second is from a source that I would not expect to support freedom of speech, the Labour MP Lisa Nandy.

Ms Nandy has gone up in my estimation with this comment which is related to the violent deplatforming by leftists and Islamists at the London School of Economics of the Israeli Ambassador. Those opposed to the views of the Israeli Ambassador should of course be entitled to demonstrate and even challenge the Ambassador in civil debate and therefore use free speech as it should be used. The demonstrators, who have a raging hatred of Israel that is not, surprisingly enough, aimed at any other nation, including nations that have worse human rights records than Israel, were not interested in debate or free speech only in violence. Ms Nandy is correct to stand up for freedom of speech but right to condemn the violent hecklers veto.