When is censorship justified?

Do you think it takes away our freedom to think and generate our own decisions? And do you think some of the questions on this site reported as 'abuse' is of late another form of letting the bullys run riot in the playground?
Its the right wing trolls who cant accept that people from the same countries are defiant illegal government activity.
Unfortunately, some individuals believe that blind patriotism is the ideal. They feel nontoxic in the bosom of the lying thieving leaders and they feel they are on the "right" side. This only provides breeding grounds for massacre and genocide. In time of war I think censorship is justified. It be a tool used by UK.gov to keep morale up here on the Home-Front with such marvelous schemes as "Dig for Vioctory" which turned every citzen beside even only a small garden, into a person doing something for the war force.

We were not told exactly how many RAF planes were lost during respectively day of the Battle of Britain. We were however told of the massive Nazi Luftwaffe losses.

Likewise the UK.gov kept up the business of propoganda and censorship right throughout the war years [1939-1945].

Today we bring UK.gov spin - which is a form of propganda.

Look at it like this. A famous spin-doctor of the Labour Party put it about that John Major tucked his vest into his underpands. I penny-pinching, it's a load of crap, but it cost John Major his premiership.

Likewise do you actually believe it when the UK.gov say that dismissal is down and that overall crime is down?

I'm a natural born sceptic - just fly that by me one more time please!!! No.

Censorship continues surrounded by this strange manner, it's called self-censorship really. Whenever a TV company want to show a movie with lots of bloodbath and sex, they always advise in mortgage, "This programme contains scenes of violence and of a sexual nature"....words to that effect. Of course this is a real big switch past its sell-by date, right?
I chew over that the only acceptable form of censorship is self-censorship and it should be applied judiciously. Your question, as it applies to this forum, is answered by the single word 'NO'. The other two question are 'YES' and 'YES'.
Not at all, if this site was an 18 and over lone, then not censoring questions beside violent or sexual content would be fine. Most people would ignore the stupid cross-question or answer if they felt the need. However, this site allows young kids, who already enjoy a misguided view on life, to see things they otherwise shouldn't. If the parents aren't watching what they are doing, which is profusely of the time, then I believe Yahoo has the right to censor the content. Unfortunately, we live in a lawsuit positive country where no one accepts responsibility for at hand own actions. So if some kid is exposed to something, it isn't the parents fault for not watching, it's yahoo, or cable,etc. I do believe there are repercussions to your answers picture if you report abuse falsely. Probably not a big deterrent for some though. I use filters on my computer to protect my daughter who is 9, from getting onto sites she shouldn't. Don't bring me wrong, I only feel when children and adults can be on the same forum it should be. As an grown, we all should be free to decide for ourselves, period.
I don't belive censorship is ever justified, it's the thin edge of the block, especially when you are told what to read, what to watch and what to think. The right to free speech is yours, in America, but not within every situation. If your speech harms me, then I may have the right to "censor" you in some situations. You can read aloud whatever you want in some settings but not in adjectives settings. Like adult content in the presence of children, is an appropriate use of censorship. There always desires to be an open forum to all ideas, controversial and mundane. But tradition must enter in as to when is not acceptable, and if wisdom lacks contained by some people, then laws are made.