So an unequivocal assertion of his absolute right to make those statements and obligation of a free society to defend him, coupled with the idea that liberals s

So an unequivocal assertion of his absolute right to make those statements and obligation of a free society to defend him, coupled with the idea that liberals shouldn't feel obliged to form a consensus opinion on the actual book... I'm sure other commentators came up with much more heavily caveated and reluctant defences of the Satanic Verses than that one, but that one seems fully in agreement with most ideals of free speech tbh, actually more so than the "Speech is violence? Not..." article author's insinuation that criticising the book or acknowledging it was offensive was incompatible with liberalism...