One of the shared assertions in almost any discussion about pluralism and freedom of expression can be found in a quote commonly attributed to Voltaire: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” It is a powerful statement of mythic proportions, and one of the most sacred principles of liberalism. But there is a problem. While the line is attributed to Voltaire, one cannot find it in his writings, and for a good reason. It was invented over a century after his death by Evelyn Beatrice Hall, who wrote "The Friends of Voltaire." And it's clearly a pompous and empty turn of phrase. I am highly doubtful whether I would be willing to die for my own views, so it stands to reason that I would be even more reluctant to die for someone else’s. Furthermore, would I be willing to die for the right of someone like a neo-Nazi to express his opinions? Of course not.
A democratic state should and can tolerate a divergence of opinions, including the most extreme opinions, and even the most infuriating ones. It's permissible to spread poison and lies or unctuous post-Zionist ideas, and yes, even to call openly for the eradication of the State of Israel as a Jewish state. My basic position is that I support absolute freedom of expression, except in cases of direct incitement to murder. I also adhere to the US Supreme Court ruling (by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. in 1919) that freedom of speech does not include the right to falsely shout "fire" in a crowded theater. Since war is a kind of crowded theater, with everyone shooting at everyone else, it seems to me that the threshold shifts, making it necessary to impose some restrictions on freedom of expression.