It hasn't been covered by mainstream media well, but Lachlan Murdoch spoke cogently at the Keith Murdoch lecture and has raised worthy issues of free speech while reminding us of history. Only, his message is bigger than he seems aware and it informs us in ways he doesn't seem to mean. Lachlan was addressing the issue of censorship over security which is growing as a result of the war on terror. The war on terror has fifth columnists who feel it is legitimate to attack cultural assets regardless of consequence. Some really stupid people are falling for terrorist propaganda partly because of censorship which prevents the average person from saying what they think on cultural and religious issues. Lachlan seems to accept those restrictions, while objecting to increased security which might arbitrarily have a field security officer deeming a news article to not be in the public interest.

A brilliant example by Lachlan is to remind of the activity of Keith Murdoch to end the Gallipoli campaign. Keith had been tasked by the Australian PM, Fisher, to find the truth about what was happening. Many younger journalists had been heavily censored by the war office regarding casualties and losses. Keith was alarmed at what he heard from Charles Beane, bad officers and needless death through incompetence. Keith tried to get a colleague to write to the Great Britain's PM, Asquith, but the letter was censored, so Keith wrote to Fisher directly and sent a copy to Asquith. Within weeks the campaign was ended and the commanding officer relieved of command. Lachlan asks if the new legislation would prevent another Keith today from their action then.

Keith was young then, and would not know what he had done, and few today seem aware of it, even though there is no active censorship regarding it. Keith had messed up big time and many tens of millions of deaths from civilians around the world have resulted from his activity. Keith did not improve the officer corp prosecuting the war. He ended a campaign shortly before it might have been successful. Certainly the retreat was hailed as bloodless after the Turks failed to press home an advantage. Had the campaign been successful Europe would have been open through the back door and the war ended, possibly by Christmas. Russia might not have fallen to Communism and China might not now be communist. There might never have been a Soviet Union, a Vietnam War or Korean war. The reparations on Germany might have been less and Nazism might have been crushed within Germany. Not to blame Keith Murdoch, but position what a civilian knows about military activity and the damage they do through ignorance.

Currently the press show no awareness of the role of radical Islam in an open society, where we question what is right and fail to say what is wrong.

Who is willing to say that a prize fighter's embrace of Islam is not manly, but a personal choice? Who is willing to say that terrorists don't speak for a majority? Impotent Islamic leaders haven't. But one must also, to be fair, point out that many impotent Christian leaders have failed to point to their cultural assets too. Lachlan is wrong not to push for an end of 18c first. He is wrong to flag press sensitivity to security when they are so actively working with the left wing to threaten world peace for Jews and conservatives and poor people who aren't on a left wing bandwagon. Currently the Australian Broadcasting Corporation is promoting an idea of a memorial to Whitlam. Maybe such a memorial is a nuclear crater in the middle of Tehran.