WE ALL GET MARTYRS WHO REFLECT OUR BELIEFS:

[R]obinson is no free-speech martyr, either. Some say he has been 'targeted' by the British state for his work 'exposing' the 'Islamification' of Britain. Some have talked about a media 'blackout' after his arrest. But the complete details of why he was arrested were published today, and this was only delayed because of further conditions imposed by the court. The idea that Robinson was arrested for his ideas is contrary to what we know about the case. Anyone else doing what Robinson did, in these circumstances, would also have been arrested and jailed.

The reaction to Robinson's arrest shows us how confused the free-speech debate has become. On the left, free speech is dismissed as a tool for the spread of fascist ideas. On the right, it is invoked in situations that have little or nothing to do with the free exchange of ideas. Arguing for free speech does not mean arguing for the right of anyone to do or say anything they want at any time. Contempt-of-court laws, which Robinson seems determined to violate, are not in and of themselves an attack on free speech. They represent a narrow curb on what can be said and when, so as to make sure trials aren't prejudiced. There may well be occasions in which such laws are used by the police to limit free speech. But Robinson's arrest was not an example of this. The men he targeted are entitled to a fair trial and the presumption of innocence. Robinson was not arrested because of what he said. He was arrested because of when and how he chose to say it.

Tweet   @brothersjudd