# Freedom of speech and protest



## dutchie (30 November 2016)

Whacko WACA wankers stop Question Time


----------



## noco (30 November 2016)

*Re: ****ASF Breaking News*****

30 Green Marxist wankers disrupt parliament question time...Protesting screaming and yelling...

https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/3336775...ter-asylum-protesters-storm-parliament/#page1

*Most government MPs, including Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, left the chamber during the protest but Labor leader Bill Shorten remained.

Greens MP Adam Bandt praised the actions of the protesters.*


----------



## pixel (30 November 2016)

*Re: ****ASF Breaking News*****



noco said:


> 30 Green Marxist wankers disrupt parliament question time...Protesting screaming and yelling...
> 
> https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/3336775...ter-asylum-protesters-storm-parliament/#page1
> 
> ...




At least  they stand up for their convictions. 
If everyone that disagrees with certain facets of the Government is a "Green Marxist Wanker", you'll have to tar about 90% of the Australian population with that brush. Including Tony Abbott, who quite often and outspoken criticises his elected successor. 
The proper answer to dissent is not walking out in a huff, but stay and listen, *then *take some time out and think about ways how people at your mercy could be treated a little more humanely. But it's of course so much easier to run away from one's job and keep blaming the Opposition for anything one doesn't have the guts or compassion to deal with.


----------



## wayneL (30 November 2016)

*Re: ****ASF Breaking News*****

What a crock if shyte, pixel.

I we (or lunatics like bandt) praise such actions,  then that legitimizes any and every group of protesters with a faux grievance, tree huggers, anti immigration groups,  PETA,  the pro gun lobby, legalize marijuana groups, the list goes on and on.

What then? Parliament ceases to function because of riff raff and wasters glueing themselves to the furniture. 


Think about what you are saying, man. That's just ludicrous.

This really belongd in the lunatic left thread.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 November 2016)

*Re: ****ASF Breaking News*****

I guess one answer is to put spectators in a soundproof box with speakers so they can listen but can't be heard. 


They can stick posters on the glass if they like, but they won't interrupt proceedings.


Not that QT is worth listening to, it's a farce, with Turnbull's feigned outrage, Morrison's bullying arrogance, and Dutton's facism.


----------



## pixel (30 November 2016)

*Re: ****ASF Breaking News*****



wayneL said:


> What a crock if shyte, pixel.
> 
> I we (or lunatics like bandt) praise such actions,  then that legitimizes any and every group of protesters with a faux grievance, tree huggers, anti immigration groups,  PETA,  the pro gun lobby, legalize marijuana groups, the list goes on and on.
> 
> ...




Oh Wayne,
I thought you knew better than that.

My rant was purely an extended reply to the "Marxist Wanker" trolling. 

If you believe it's OK to treat human beings the way "illegals" are, by all means, stand next to noco and cast the next stone. Or shut your eyes and run away like Turnbull and Cabinet members.

If showing a modicum of compassion makes me a left lunatic, I'll wear that badge with pride.


----------



## noco (30 November 2016)

*Re: ****ASF Breaking News*****



pixel said:


> Oh Wayne,
> I thought you knew better than that.
> 
> My rant was purely an extended reply to the "Marxist Wanker" trolling.
> ...




I like your self appraisal......Not many would admit to it like you have.


----------



## McLovin (1 December 2016)

*Re: ****ASF Breaking News*****



pixel said:


> Oh Wayne,
> I thought you knew better than that.
> 
> My rant was purely an extended reply to the "Marxist Wanker" trolling.
> ...






Great post. Agree totally.


----------



## wayneL (1 December 2016)

*Re: ****ASF Breaking News*****



pixel said:


> Oh Wayne,
> I thought you knew better than that.
> 
> My rant was purely an extended reply to the "Marxist Wanker" trolling.
> ...




FYI 

The reference to lunatic left was for Bandt, not you.

Re compassion, sure, but surely you see that we cannot allow unfettered immigration, whether by normal,  legal or illegal channels AND maintain our country by its intended social design. 

But, if the shoe fits...


----------



## Ves (1 December 2016)

*Re: ****ASF Breaking News*****



noco said:


> The usual Fabian ridicule reply to silence your opponent and ain't gonna work sonny.



Does that mean you're a Fabian since you want people who protest in parliament to be silenced?!?


----------



## noco (1 December 2016)

*Re: ****ASF Breaking News*****



Ves said:


> Does that mean you're a Fabian since you want people who protest in parliament to be silenced?!?




Are you talking about that Marxist Green rabble that disrupted parliament yesterday?

I am sure the majority of people in this country were disgusted at such behavior and I am sure it would not have increased the Greens popularity ....They are already on the slide....There is a right and wrong way of  going about a demonstration and the way they did it yesterday was the wrong way.

You seem to forget the Government has Labor bi-partisan support on the settlement of illegal boat people on Manus and Nauru and that is they will not be coming to Australia.

Do you understand or would you like me to send you a message in Braille if you cannot rtead?


----------



## Ves (1 December 2016)

*Re: ****ASF Breaking News*****



noco said:


> Do you understand or would you like me to send you a message in Braille if you cannot rtead?



So basically you are saying that free speech should only allowed if it does not disgust you (or supposedly someone else)?

Well,  that in itself is very interesting and seems to contradict your views re 18C!!


----------



## McLovin (1 December 2016)

*Re: ****ASF Breaking News*****



Ves said:


> So basically you are saying that free speech should only allowed if it does not disgust you (or supposedly someone else)?
> 
> Well,  that in itself is very interesting and seems to contradict your views re 18C!!




I thought the Hillbilly Dictator died in 2005, turns out he's living up in Townsville.


----------



## noco (1 December 2016)

*Re: ****ASF Breaking News*****



Ves said:


> So basically you are saying that free speech should only allowed if it does not disgust you (or supposedly someone else)?
> 
> Well,  that in itself is very interesting and seems to contradict your views re 18C!!




So what are my views on 18c?..I have basically said nothing, so please don't try fabricating something that is not true......You are romancing with yourself.

Free speech is a treasure that is being destroyed by the Lunatic left......Just ask Gillian Triggs or Cindy Prior......Ask the 3 university students, Bill Leak and Andrew Bolt what they think of 18c.


----------



## noco (1 December 2016)

*Re: ****ASF Breaking News*****



McLovin said:


> I thought the Hillbilly Dictator died in 2005, turns out he's living up in Townsville.




I don't know him....who is he or don't you have the guts to put name to it...I am sure Joe Blow would also like to know.

Your personal attacks are getting our of hand but I guess that is the only juvenile way you know.


----------



## noco (1 December 2016)

*Re: ****ASF Breaking News*****



Tisme said:


> ABC24 site him being interviewed at time I posted. I watch things live if I can




Went through 10 pages of ABC24 news in the past 24 hours twice......Could not find anything you referred to about  Malcolm Turnbull.....

http://www.abc.net.au/news/justin/?page=1


----------



## McLovin (1 December 2016)

*Re: ****ASF Breaking News*****



noco said:


> I don't know him....who is he or don't you have the guts to put name to it...I am sure Joe Blow would also like to know.




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joh_Bjelke-Petersen



noco said:


> Your personal attacks are getting our of hand but I guess that is the only juvenile way you know.




That's an odd comment from a guy who can't get through a day without calling someone a fabian/socialist/communist.


----------



## Ves (1 December 2016)

*Re: ****ASF Breaking News*****



noco said:


> So what are my views on 18c?..I have basically said nothing, so please don't try fabricating something that is not true......You are romancing with yourself.



Ahh,  but you have said, and I paraphrase here,  that you want it removed as it stops free speech.

Now this is where there seems to be a contradiction in your view that free speech should be protected.

You say things like:



> Free speech is a treasure that is being destroyed by the Lunatic left.......




But then you feel disgusted when a group uses their free speech to protest in parliament.  Or to protest Trump's presidency.

It sounds to me like you want the following:

Free speech for anyone who is right-wing and agrees with you.

No free speech for anyone who is left-wing and disagrees with you.

Correct?

I also note that personal attacks are free speech so....



> Your personal attacks are getting our of hand but I guess that is the only juvenile way you know




....Seems like another odd statement made by someone who treasures free speech!!!


----------



## Joe Blow (1 December 2016)

Gents, I'm just extricating this discussion on freedom and speech and protest from the *****ASF Breaking News***** thread.

Just a reminder to avoid personal attacks and to discuss the topic in a civil and respectful way.

Please continue.


----------



## wayneL (1 December 2016)

*Re: ****ASF Breaking News*****



Ves said:


> Ahh,  but you have said, and I paraphrase here,  that you want it removed as it stops free speech.
> 
> Now this is where there seems to be a contradiction in your view that free speech should be protected.
> 
> ...




Notwithstanding any of the points you have made,  speaking against the us of speech, and legislating against it, are two different  things.

I am happy for people to speak against racist, sexist etc language, vociferously if theyfeel so strongly.

18c however, though practically toothless due to 18d,  can be invoked poisonously,  as we have seen.

Also, liberty has a heirarchy. Prorest by all means, so long as that does not impinge on the the rightful liberty of others.


----------



## Ves (1 December 2016)

*Re: ****ASF Breaking News*****



wayneL said:


> Notwithstanding any of the points you have made,  speaking against the us of speech, and legislating against it, are two different  things.



There's an incredibly deep philosophical history regarding this distinction,  but unfortunately I'm not really well versed in a lot of it,  so for the purposes of this conversation let's just accept your premise.

This next part I find interesting  (I've omitted your quote re 18C).



wayneL said:


> I am happy for people to speak against racist, sexist etc language, vociferously if theyfeel so strongly.






wayneL said:


> Also, liberty has a heirarchy. Prorest by all means, so long as that does not impinge on the the rightful liberty of others.




Which is probably fair enough,  but between this right to speak strongly against a thing/opinion and the concept of 'impinging on the rightful liberty of others' there is an incredible amount of tension.  It's a massive grey area.   And in itself,  quite evidently, inadvertently destroys freedom of speech   (and in a lot of cases most people would be happy it does).

I am sure you will agree that there lies within this grey area a constant tug of war between impinging too much on the liberty of the speaker and the liberty of the (sometimes unintentional) audience.   Thus we find ourselves tangled in contradictions,  some groups can say certain things, whilst others cannot say them.

As you know,  if the law (government) will not restrict speech,  then people themselves will.   So how do you stop certain groups who are more powerful/influential than others from using this from the detriment of others?  Throughout history,  there are instances of the aristocracy/elites/ruling class, whatever you want to call them, speaking freely themselves,  and using their power to impose incredible limits on those from outside of their class.


----------



## qldfrog (2 December 2016)

*Re: ****ASF Breaking News*****



Ves said:


> Throughout history,  there are instances of the aristocracy/elites/ruling class, whatever you want to call them, speaking freely themselves,  and using their power to impose incredible limits on those from outside of their class.



A nice example being the treatment in media of the refugee/ illegal migrants/invasion in Europe which is linked to anti racism laws to legally prevent free speech or even discussion at all;
far right movements thereare  spending endless time in courts/losing cases for statement many would just consider obvious/common sense
Free speech limitation is the must have of dictatures, many failed to notice it creeping in what were Western democracies..and now 1984 is around.


----------



## dutchie (2 December 2016)

Parliament activists were professional protesters who travel the globe
SHARRI MARKSON AND DANIEL MEERS, The Daily Telegraph
December 1, 2016 9:00pm

THE lefty-activists who have held federal Parliament to ransom for two days are professional protesters who travel the globe causing chaos in the name of bleeding-heart causes.

From “dumpster-diving” student union officers to scholarship-recipients, the group protest about refugees, climate change, coal seam gas, the use of oil, trade and Aboriginal rights.

The group’s spokesman, Phil Evans, admits some don’t have a job and may receive welfare payments. But, he said, social security payments are low.

Yet, The Daily Telegraph has learned, they found the money to travel to Paris last year to partake in Climate Change marches and North Dakota in the US last month to protest an oil pipeline.


http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...e/news-story/63e236a069dd0f2530b7a619fc8737f3


----------



## Knobby22 (2 December 2016)

Very photogenic group.
Feels like rich kids having fun while maybe dragging along a few beautiful people who aren't quite so wealthy.


----------



## Tink (2 December 2016)

dutchie said:


> Parliament activists were professional protesters who travel the globe
> SHARRI MARKSON AND DANIEL MEERS, The Daily Telegraph
> December 1, 2016 9:00pm
> 
> ...




Probably the same ones that I mentioned a while back, that hung off the Eastern Freeway Overpass and climbed the Arts Centre spire, in Melbourne.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...t=28209&page=5&p=898817&viewfull=1#post898817

_The same women that hung off the Eastern Freeway Overpass, are now climbing the Arts Centre spire, to hang up a piece of cloth.

Are these people fined for wasting police resources for the day?_


----------



## explod (4 December 2016)

> Contrary to some media reports, we did not “storm” parliament. We entered calmly as citizens. Anyone who has ever seen question time knows our politicians behave like children, constantly ridiculing and interrupting each other.
> 
> The response of these (mostly) men, who ostensibly work for us, was cowardly and juvenile. Bill Shorten’s comments that “this is the exact opposite of democracy” show that he has forgotten where his party came from; Malcolm Turnbull turned away and smirked; Peter Dutton could not look us in the eye; the majority of the Liberal party walked out. Why won’t they listen?
> 
> ...




https://www.theguardian.com/austral...-parliament-for-refugees-we-ask-why-didnt-you

It is worth remembering also that our white society in Australia evolved from uninvited boat people.  I do feel proud that our younger people are still able to speak out and if that disrupts the mostly corrupt Parliamentarians, so be it.


----------



## noco (4 December 2016)

explod said:


> https://www.theguardian.com/austral...-parliament-for-refugees-we-ask-why-didnt-you
> 
> It is worth remembering also that our white society in Australia evolved from uninvited boat people.  I do feel proud that our younger people are still able to speak out and if that disrupts the mostly corrupt Parliamentarians, so be it.




I regret to say it but the Greens have not done themselves any favors with the support they gave to the 30 demonstrators at Parliament house......You will see the Greens  polling go down even further than the poll I gave you a couple of days ago. 

What did they gain out of it all?....Were they able to persuade the Government to bring those illegal boat people to Australia?.....It was a total waste of time and effort on the part of the demonstrators.

There is a right and wrong way to enter Australia and que jumping and coming in the back door is the wrong way.

We take in refugees in a controlled manner and it is time you Greens acknowledged it all.

Those illegal boat people are not going to be settled in Australia ...FULL STOP....So tell them to give up and start behaving like adults.


----------



## Tisme (5 December 2016)

Where's Jim Cairns when a protest movement needs him?


----------



## noco (3 April 2017)

Rowan Dean is gobsmacked at the recent statement put out by Gillian Triggs.....This woman who is receiving well in excess of $450,000 per annum will not be missed when her time is up in a few weeks......Triggs is a Greenie through and through appointed by non other than that self confessed communist Julia Gillard.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...e/news-story/0e27ad15d13da39ac6776fd689b515f8


----------



## Tink (4 April 2017)

And they have shown their true colours this week, that they truly are Communists.


----------



## Tisme (4 April 2017)

noco said:


> Rowan Dean is gobsmacked at the recent statement put out by Gillian Triggs.....This woman who is receiving well in excess of $450,000 per annum will not be missed when her time is up in a few weeks......Triggs is a Greenie through and through appointed by non other than that self confessed communist Julia Gillard.
> 
> http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...e/news-story/0e27ad15d13da39ac6776fd689b515f8





I would have suggested exercising willful power to keep the glass ceiling open for the sisters was the real reason behind Gillian throwing the young men from QUT under the bus.


----------



## luutzu (4 April 2017)

noco said:


> Rowan Dean is gobsmacked at the recent statement put out by Gillian Triggs.....This woman who is receiving well in excess of $450,000 per annum will not be missed when her time is up in a few weeks......Triggs is a Greenie through and through appointed by non other than that self confessed communist Julia Gillard.
> 
> http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...e/news-story/0e27ad15d13da39ac6776fd689b515f8




We'd all be shocked if there's ever a fair-minded Human Rights commissioner who's a right winger. So of course she's a Greenie leftist commo.


----------



## Tink (5 April 2017)

Just like Cuba and Castro..

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/the-lunatic-left.31648/


----------



## Tink (26 May 2017)

Luutzu, just to answer from the Islam thread..
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/islam-is-it-inherently-evil.29119/page-141

I have already mentioned the political terrorists within.
Melbourne is a hot spot, especially with the Greens (Communists), imv.

Smashing windows, vandalising, stopping people entering private venues and/or universities

These people have no idea about public and private property.

These protestors should be made accountable for the damage they do, out of their pockets, not the taxpayer.


----------



## wayneL (27 May 2017)

luutzu said:


> We'd all be shocked if there's ever a fair-minded Human Rights commissioner who's a right winger. So of course she's a Greenie leftist commo.



Hilarious... Greenies/commos have no interest in human rights, the unfettered ideology is totalitarian in the extreme. 

Of course, in true Orwellian doublespeak, they mouth platitudes to human rights and free speech, all the while steadfastly removing the same.


----------



## orr (28 May 2017)

wayneL said:


> Hilarious... Greenies/commos have no interest in human rights, the unfettered ideology is totalitarian in the extreme.
> 
> Of course, in true Orwellian doublespeak, they mouth platitudes to human rights and free speech, all the while steadfastly removing the same.




So Jack Mundy's(yeah the BLF) green bans that saved the Queen Vic Building, Sick pay and workers compensation, the abolition of slavery, The concept of the 40 Hr working week, Anti Vietnam war protests, I can go on.... Commo's and stooges all...
 Your porosity of vocabulary has trapped your thinking son. Expand, if you can, to the point where if you get on your tippy toes you can just about make Progressive and Reactionary, over the top of the ideology that bubbles all around you...
Noam Chompski on your bookshelves?... speaking of which.

 say whatever you like ... George Brandis has got his ear out for it... along with the 'Five Eye's'


----------



## Tink (28 May 2017)

Cut back on these public servants.

Councils/local government
State Government
and then we have Federal Government

Local councils should not be there to push causes on taxpayer dollars.


----------



## wayneL (29 May 2017)

orr said:


> So Jack Mundy's(yeah the BLF) green bans that saved the Queen Vic Building, Sick pay and workers compensation, the abolition of slavery, The concept of the 40 Hr working week, Anti Vietnam war protests, I can go on.... Commo's and stooges all...
> Your porosity of vocabulary has trapped your thinking son. Expand, if you can, to the point where if you get on your tippy toes you can just about make Progressive and Reactionary, over the top of the ideology that bubbles all around you...
> Noam Chompski on your bookshelves?... speaking of which.
> 
> say whatever you like ... George Brandis has got his ear out for it... along with the 'Five Eye's'




I said unfettered ideology my blinkered friend, one must look further afield from your confirmationally(sic) biased bubble than Comrade Noam et al for such examples.


----------



## Tink (30 May 2017)

Good on Margaret Court for saying what she thinks.

Of course the left talk about diversity and tolerance, but don't show the same.
Their attack on her is disgraceful, imv.

As for Alan Joyce, he seems to be pushing his own agenda on Qantas.
I see they are connected with Emirates.


----------



## Tisme (30 May 2017)

Tink said:


> Good on Margaret Court for saying what she thinks.
> 
> Of course the left talk about diversity and tolerance, but don't show the same.
> Their attack on her is disgraceful, imv.
> ...





Don't watch The Panel if you suffer coulrophobia. They even dress the part.

Apparently our Muslim self appointed sheriff of the moral high ground shot Margaret down and handed her ar5e back to her.

https://www.pedestrian.tv/news/arts...r-on/e0ca677b-1ec1-4885-80ff-e41156911707.htm

Alan Joyce looks after his own, John Travolta being one of his triumphs.


----------



## wayneL (30 May 2017)

Qantas will be suffering the ignomious and financially disastrous consequences of me boycotting their airline too </tongueincheek>

....not because I am against gay marriage,  but because I am against social agendas from such a business.

I rather think Marg should have kept her mouth shut,  unless she had honed her argument and subtle logical fallacy to the extend the shrillest of the left have.

A lamb to the slaughter.

But the left continue to mire themselves in the Orewllian double standards and doubletalk that critically thinking folks instantly recognise as poisonous hypocritical intolerance cultural vandalism.

Bring on the ideological civil war when the moderate majority finally assert themself.  

May Joyce, Aly, andcthecrest of the pompous, purulent Deprogressives, sink into the stinking abyss of their own making.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 May 2017)

wayneL said:


> ....not because I am against gay marriage, but because I am against social agendas from such a business.




Believe it or not I agree completely. I dislike being dragged into a social engineering agenda simply because I give my custom to a particular business. 

If a Qantas passenger declines to wear their badge or whatever, is a gay steward going to "accidentally" spill coffee in their lap ? This is the question a lot of passengers will be asking.

If Alan Joyce wants to conduct a personal campaign, that's up to him, but I don't think he should be dragging shareholders or customers into a battle that they don't necessarily want to engage in.


----------



## Tisme (30 May 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Believe it or not I agree completely. I dislike being dragged into a social engineering agenda simply because I give my custom to a particular business.
> 
> If a Qantas passenger declines to wear their badge or whatever, is a gay steward going to "accidentally" spill coffee in their lap ? This is the question a lot of passengers will be asking.
> 
> If Alan Joyce wants to conduct a personal campaign, that's up to him, but I don't think he should be dragging shareholders or customers into a battle that they don't necessarily want to engage in.




Unfortunately many adults do think like children and interpret lack of overt resistance as implicit support.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 May 2017)

Tisme said:


> Unfortunately many adults do think like children and interpret lack of overt resistance as implicit support.




Yes, Hilary Clinton found that out.


----------



## McLovin (30 May 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Believe it or not I agree completely. I dislike being dragged into a social engineering agenda simply because I give my custom to a particular business.




Then don't give them your custom...


----------



## SirRumpole (30 May 2017)

McLovin said:


> Then don't give them your custom...




I may or may not, but I wonder if the majority of Qantas shareholders approve of a policy that may turn customers off.


----------



## McLovin (30 May 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I may or may not, but I wonder if the majority of Qantas shareholders approve of a policy that may turn customers off.




Considering every other corporate of size in Australia seems to be on board with gay marriage I doubt Qantas is losing sleep over whether it will affect their p&l.

The bigger issue is the droop on the Skybed.


----------



## Ves (30 May 2017)

McLovin said:


> Considering every other corporate of size in Australia seems to be on board with gay marriage I doubt Qantas is losing sleep over whether it will affect their p&l.
> 
> The bigger issue is the droop on the Skybed.



Surely there's a votocrat poll that says otherwise mate?


----------



## McLovin (30 May 2017)

Ves said:


> Surely there's a votocrat poll that says otherwise mate?




Yes. Some polls indicate 99.2% of people don't support gay marriage on Votocrap.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 May 2017)

McLovin said:


> Yes. Some polls indicate 99.2% of people don't support gay marriage on Votocrap.




So have a plebiscite and find out for real.


----------



## Tink (30 May 2017)

They don't want a plebiscite, they want to sack or 'ban for life', anyone that doesn't agree with them.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 May 2017)

If the ABC publicly supported gay marriage they would be called leftist ratbags and would be threatened with funding cuts.


----------



## Tink (30 May 2017)

I also meant to add -- The reason, imv, Margaret came forward was because of Alan Joyce banning that man for life.


----------



## sptrawler (31 May 2017)

I hate talking on issues like this, but why does the media have free rein to decide what is the correct outcome?
Why do reporters have free rein , to peddle their agenda, while suppressing others?
Where the hell is management? probably supping wine and wondering why the masses are pi$$ed off.


----------



## sptrawler (31 May 2017)

Tink said:


> I also meant to add -- The reason, imv, Margaret came forward was because of Alan Joyce banning that man for life.




The problem Margret Court has, she has taken on the media at large, they obviously are full of people with a strong social conscience.
Supported by a high capitalist salary, hope the conflict works out well for them. lol
May end up as a watershed moment.IMO
The general public is getting well and truly fed up with the media.
Chanel 10 is an example, the project, I have 10 shares(sadly) and I don't watch it.lol
Why the hell would you?


----------



## Tink (1 June 2017)

Margaret Court Arena is there because of her tennis achievements.

The law of this land is Marriage between one man and one woman.
We do have unions which are exactly the same, for same sex couples, as do many other countries.
Switzerland, Germany etc have the same as we do.

She is entitled to her view, as are others.

As a democracy and a country that is supposed to have freedom of speech, we should still be allowed to say what we think. imv.


----------



## PZ99 (1 June 2017)

Happily, Alan Joyce has similar rights to Margaret Court when it comes to freedom of speech


----------



## Tink (1 June 2017)

And he uses the Qantas flag as his own private business.

We won't be using Qantas.


----------



## PZ99 (1 June 2017)

In that case I guess you won't be doing business with any of these companies then?







http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...k=e9bbac719df9f4e81c3347abd9650d30-1496265582


----------



## McLovin (1 June 2017)

sptrawler said:


> The problem Margret Court has




...is she's as bat **** crazy as any other religious nut...


----------



## Tink (1 June 2017)

We have choices, and that is how it should be.


----------



## Jorgensen (1 June 2017)

On twitter there are articles about her support for apartheid,after Arthur Ashe was banned from playing in South Africa.
Quite a piece of work is our Margaret!


----------



## wayneL (1 June 2017)

McLovin said:


> ...is she's as bat **** crazy as any other religious nut...



Curious... the left loves to ridicule the Margaret Courts of the world... 

...and loves to support pious muslims.

The funny thins is that on this and many other issues, they don't see their own monumental hypocrisy. 

Make that megalithical....

...actually, make that  galaxical(sic)


----------



## Ves (1 June 2017)

wayneL said:


> Curious... the left loves to ridicule the Margaret Courts of the world...
> 
> ...and loves to support pious muslims.
> 
> ...



About the only 'megalithical' thing going on here is the false dichotomy you just created out of thin air.

The dichotomy you should be looking at is with/without.


----------



## pixel (1 June 2017)

McLovin said:


> ...is she's as bat **** crazy as any other religious nut...



... and the problem that Australia has is that any bat **** crazy nutter can offer his or her opinion and find media willing to publish it. All under the presumption "My ignorance is just as good as any scientist's knowledge."
Only look around on Canberra's benches: Abbott, Hanson (both the old and -Young), Catter, Barnaby, ... the list is endless. And they all find sufficient numbers in the population at large that think their opinions are steeped in perfect wisdom.


----------



## wayneL (1 June 2017)

Ves said:


> About the only 'megalithical' thing going on here is the false dichotomy you just created out of thin air.
> 
> The dichotomy you should be looking at is with/without.




It's the end of the day,  its been a hard one at the vet clinic and Ive used up my quota of thinkery on a couple of out the freakin box cases.

You're going to have to explain that one Ves.


----------



## McLovin (1 June 2017)

wayneL said:


> Curious... the left loves to ridicule the Margaret Courts of the world...
> 
> ...and loves to support pious muslims.




Do they? That's nice. If a Muslim was comparing gays to Hitler and talking about mind control and the Devil I would call them bat **** crazy. I bet "the right" would too; how's that for hypocrisy.


----------



## wayneL (1 June 2017)

McLovin said:


> Do they? That's nice. If a Muslim was comparing gays to Hitler and talking about mind control and the Devil I would call them bat **** crazy. I bet "the right" would too; how's that for hypocrisy.



<cough > You don't think they have their own ludicrity(sic)?

Or are the 72 virgins a reality?


----------



## Ves (1 June 2017)

wayneL said:


> It's the end of the day,  its been a hard one at the vet clinic and Ive used up my quota of thinkery on a couple of out the freakin box cases.
> 
> You're going to have to explain that one Ves.



What's to explain?

There are those "With" things (ie.  space, power, privilege,) and those "Without" those things.  

The whole scenario of "hypocrisy" you were trying to describe might make more sense to you if you break it down into those two categories.


----------



## wayneL (1 June 2017)

Ves said:


> What's to explain?
> 
> There are those "With" things (ie.  space, power, privilege,) and those "Without" those things.
> 
> The whole scenario of "hypocrisy" you were trying to describe might make more sense to you if you break it down into those two categories.



I still can't see any false dichotomy or how you made the leap from one to the other.  Still scratching my head Komrade.


----------



## Ves (1 June 2017)

wayneL said:


> I still can't see any false dichotomy or how you made the leap from one to the other.  Still scratching my head Komrade.




Read what you wrote again:



> Curious... the left loves to ridicule the Margaret Courts of the world...
> 
> ...and loves to support pious muslims.




It's not a contradiction.  You're just looking at it wrong.  That's all I'm saying.


----------



## McLovin (1 June 2017)

wayneL said:


> <cough > You don't think they have their own ludicrity(sic)?
> 
> Or are the 72 virgins a reality?




Huh? I'm saying they do. Why do you think I said "religious nut" not Christian. They're all the same as far as I'm concerned. The only thing that differs is 500 years of secularism.

Perhaps if you stop seeing the world as left and right, white and black you might stop ascribing beliefs to me.


----------



## orr (1 June 2017)

If only you all could  have been there...
_'Bat $hit'_ got a mention recently above ..here it is below.
One of the few evenings attended where the St Johns Ambulance were  issued with a supply of straight jackets...under supplied.


----------



## wayneL (2 June 2017)

McLovin said:


> Huh? I'm saying they do. Why do you think I said "religious nut" not Christian. They're all the same as far as I'm concerned. The only thing that differs is 500 years of secularism.




Fair enough, I misinterpreted what you wrote. However the left clearly supports religious Muslims while having disdain for religious Christians. It's a fact.

[/QUOTE]Perhaps if you stop seeing the world as left and right, white and black you might stop ascribing beliefs to me.[/QUOTE]

Huh? I haven't ascribed any beliefs to you at all, merely debating points as you present them. As a point, perhaps you may have ascribed beliefs to me?

MvLovin the world IS right and left, with a full spectrum in between, AND often with a high degree of overlap. For the record I class myself as more of a classical liberal rather than a conservative, with some concessions to social liberalism. Technically left of center, but I just consider the current iteration of leftism as a poison that will eventually destroy the west.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 June 2017)

wayneL said:


> However the left clearly supports religious Muslims while having disdain for religious Christians. It's a fact.




And the "right" clearly support pious Christians while having contempt for Muslims.

That's a fact too. Refer Tony Abbot, Andrew Bolt etc.


----------



## Tink (2 June 2017)

McLovin, you are entitled to your view.

The SSM activists and their bullying antics have been mentioned before.

Bill Leak was one
Waffen SSM
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/t...s-commission-a-national-disgrace.31515/page-4

I agreed with him, not to mention the 'unsafe school programs' that have been indoctrinating public schools.
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/chaos-in-australian-education.25851/page-6

I also mentioned Qantas the SSM carrier being connected to Emirates.
I didn't see Emirates on that list.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emirates_(airline)

-------------------

I do believe in choice, as I have mentioned before.
I am all for public and private.

Our foundations are Christian.
Political Correctness is a poison, imv.


----------



## wayneL (2 June 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> And the "right" clearly support pious Christians while having contempt for Muslims.
> 
> That's a fact too. Refer Tony Abbot, Andrew Bolt etc.




Of course they do Horace! I would expect Hindus to support Hindus too.

Christianity is culturally congruent to our Western Culture. We have Christian Holidays and Christian lexicon. We have rightly secularized and bolstered the rights of women and racial minorities, largely because of the work of the moderate left.

This is why it is totally stupifying that the left has decided to support  incongruous Islamaic culture and practice.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 June 2017)

wayneL said:


> This is why it is totally stupifying that the left has decided to support incongruous Islamaic culture and practice.




Who in the 'Left' are you actually talking about ?


----------



## wayneL (2 June 2017)

Hundreds and hundreds of articles and examples out there Horace, this article s interesting from a moderate Muslims point of view:

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10091/muslims-liberals-leftists


----------



## Ves (2 June 2017)

wayneL said:


> Fair enough, I misinterpreted what you wrote. However the left clearly supports religious Muslims while having disdain for religious Christians. It's a fact.



Yes, they do.  But it's not for the reasons you are ascribing.

Generally (and obviously not in every case) Christians come from wealthier Western counties and Muslims come from poor Eastern (or underdeveloped) countries.

Strip away the religious aspect.  It's pretty easy to see that the so called 'Left' among us are fighting for these people because they lack basic rights,  they're poor,  they're mostly stuck under oppressive authoritarian regimes.

Obviously this has got lost in the wash some where along the way and it's been turned into a Christianity vs. Muslim thing (which suits the "Right" because it becomes a "protect Tradition" argument), which I don't think it should be.


----------



## McLovin (2 June 2017)

wayneL said:


> Huh? I haven't ascribed any beliefs to you at all, merely debating points as you present them. As a point, perhaps you may have ascribed beliefs to me?




How about we just say we got our wires crossed somewhere.



wayneL said:


> MvLovin the world IS right and left, with a full spectrum in between, AND often with a high degree of overlap. For the record I class myself as more of a classical liberal rather than a conservative, with some concessions to social liberalism. Technically left of center, but I just consider the current iteration of leftism as a poison that will eventually destroy the west.




No the world is not right and left. You've just done a great job of explaining why it's not (I'm not being sarcastic when I say that either). In my experience "right" and "left" are terms used by people who sit at the far ends of the spectrum, and use them as pejoratives to describe those whom they disagree with. Maybe it's my own bias, but I roll my eyes at the mention of the left or the right, as though they are two monolithic groups in which everyone is at home in one or the other. 



			
				Tink said:
			
		

> McLovin, you are entitled to your view.
> 
> The SSM activists and their bullying antics have been mentioned before.




Tink, as much as I disagree with you on most everything, I do respect that you play the ball not the man. 

It seems to me that anytime someone makes a controversial remark (whatever their political beliefs) the knee jerk reaction is to claim that those who criticise them are called bullies. If Margaret Court wants to step into the bear pit of public opinion, and castigate a group of people, then she's going to need a thicker skin and expect some blow-back. Free speech cuts both ways.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 June 2017)

McLovin said:


> No the world is not right and left. You've just done a great job of explaining why it's not (I'm not being sarcastic when I say that either). In my experience "right" and "left" are terms used by people who sit at the far ends of the spectrum, and use them as pejoratives to describe those whom they disagree with. Maybe it's my own bias, but I roll my eyes at the mention of the left or the right, as though they are two monolithic groups in which everyone is at home in one or the other.




Well said. Most voters are smart enough not to fall for the Left/Right tripe, and will vote according to the most noble tradition of all...self interest.


----------



## wayneL (2 June 2017)

Okay, so we are saying that Corey Bernardi is not right wing, and Sarah Hansen Young is not left wing.

Roger that, George O. would be proud.


----------



## McLovin (2 June 2017)

wayneL said:


> Okay, so we are saying that Corey Bernardi is not right wing, and Sarah Hansen Young is not left wing.
> 
> Roger that, George O. would be proud.




So the evidence that the _world _ is left and right is Bernardi and Hanson-Young. 

Maybe I need to say this again...



> In my experience "right" and "left" are terms used by people who sit at the far ends of the spectrum, and use them as pejoratives to describe those whom they disagree with.




I think your George Orwell analogy has long been beaten to death, Wayne.


----------



## wayneL (2 June 2017)

Orwell is apt.
But for a bit of fun :
￼


----------



## McLovin (2 June 2017)

wayneL said:


> Orwell is apt.
> But for a bit of fun :
> ￼



See, I knew you understood.


----------



## Tink (3 June 2017)

Thanks, McLovin.

imv, we are all voices and a part of our country, and though we may agree or disagree, that is the reality.


----------



## pixel (4 June 2017)

McLovin said:


> It seems to me that anytime someone makes a controversial remark (whatever their political beliefs) the knee jerk reaction is to claim that those who criticise them are called bullies. If Margaret Court wants to step into the bear pit of public opinion, and castigate a group of people, then she's going to need a thicker skin and expect some blow-back. Free speech cuts both ways.



... and that, dear reader, is what's wrong with all debating in public:
People with an agenda love to dish it out, claim their own position is the only acceptable truth and everybody who differs is a heathen/ ultra/ leftie/ idiot, ...
And when the other side returns in kind, just with different pejoratives, they cry foul and play the innocent victim card.

There is IMHO only one way to solve the impasse and save $Billions of wasted time, money, and efforts of Courts, Jurisdiction, and supervising Committees:

Tell people "you're free to speak (and write/ tweet) your mind"
Tell people "if someone's opinion hurts your feelings, tough titties! Grow a pair, or stop reading/ listening. In other words: Get over it!"
Only a single Law is required: "Anybody reacting to a perceived 'insult' with physical violence will spend 5 years in jail, preferably sharing a cell with a member of the opposite side of argument."


----------



## Tisme (4 June 2017)

pixel said:


> ... and that, dear reader, is what's wrong with all debating in public:
> People with an agenda love to dish it out, claim their own position is the only acceptable truth and everybody who differs is a heathen/ ultra/ leftie/ idiot, ...
> And when the other side returns in kind, just with different pejoratives, they cry foul and play the innocent victim card.
> 
> ...





Sticks and stones will break ........


----------



## basilio (5 June 2017)

Well looks like we don't need to "be nice" any more. Ditch civility, respect, consideration. Just say what we like, when we like, how we like. 

And if "they" don't like it - well suck it up princess.

Are you folks serious with this xhit?  Is our society going to improve with an open slather approach to deciding that all "xagheads" should be (humanely...) sent ...somewhere else. That "xites" are secretly ruling the world, taking over our businesses ect.
And as for those satanic xoofs. Clearly corrupting our dear little ones and have to equally taken care of..

*Verbal abuse is assault.* Since when do we accept verbal assaults on individuals and entire communities as righteous. Really ?


----------



## orr (5 June 2017)

Tisme said:


> Sticks and stones will break ........




mmmmm.. But whips and chains excite me.

(_thanks Parko_)


----------



## wayneL (5 June 2017)

basilio said:


> Well looks like we don't need to "be nice" any more. Ditch civility, respect, consideration. Just say what we like, when we like, how we like.
> 
> And if "they" don't like it - well suck it up princess.
> 
> ...




I don't see you being nice to Climate moderates or not communists bas.

Gooses and ganders(sic) etc


----------



## basilio (5 June 2017)

wayneL said:


> I don't see you being nice to Climate moderates or not communists bas.
> 
> Gooses and ganders(sic) etc



Actually.. I try... and sometimes when I reckon I have gone too far,  I have apologised.

Maybe it's worth looking at the substance of what I was saying.
__________________________________________
( _Climate moderates....hmnn_ )


----------



## pixel (5 June 2017)

basilio said:


> *Verbal abuse is assault*



verbal abuse is only verbal abuse if the addressee accepts it as such.
Over recent decades, our kids have become increasingly sensitive and self-conscious, to the point that it only takes a sidelong glance or a frown to feel offended. Helicopter parents and cottonwool schools are IMHO equally to blame, egged-on, of course, by a fraternity of client-chasing Litigation Lawyers.

In the past, if a kid fell off the swing on a playground and grazed a knee, Mum took out the Dettol and a band aid and said "that'll teach you to be more careful next time."
Today, Mum rushes Little Precious to the ER, and while the nurse slaps a band aid on, Mum calls a Lawyer to find out for how much she can sue the City Council.

If an Italian kid got called "Ding", or a Greek teased as "Wog Boy", they didn't commit suicide, but shrugged it off as Tisme said: "Sticks and stones ..." If the teasing got out of hand, the teacher would call the Bully to order or to the Principal's office.

Discipline, respect, civility, manners - call it what you want - were indelible part of parental role model, school curriculum, and widely accepted. The few bullies that failed to "get it" were not treated as a protected minority, whose fragile little egos deserved the same consideration as everybody else's. They were ostracised. Pitied maybe, and sometimes called to order by well-meaning little old ladies that tried to "reform" them. In the main, however, discussions rarely became heated and personal to the point where self-centered argumentative old fools felt the need to accept verbal *in*sults as *as*saults.


----------



## basilio (5 June 2017)

_*Verbal abuse is assault.  Bas*
 verbal abuse is only verbal abuse if the addressee accepts it as such.  Pixel_

Are we on the same page here re. verbal abuse ?  I can see your argument about helicopter parents and cotton wool schools  (maybe..) I just don't get the idea that just abusing someone because they are Muslim, white, gay,beautiful,  Jewish, black, retarded, a girl, old, fat, illiterate, whatever is a good look. The conversations in some of these threads seems to have moved to the position that people can only take offence.  It sounds as if people are defending their right to say anything to or about another person and if they take offence well that is their problem. I won't buy that. I won't accept it.

The point of a civil society is just that. The underlying ethos is civility.  An archaic, brutalised society where casual abuse is accepted is just a xhit place to be in - unless of course one is only on the giving side of abuse, never receives it and is pretty happy with that situation. Is that where we want to go ?


----------



## wayneL (5 June 2017)

It's a big, wide, fuzzy grey line fellas.

I was a Yank in 1970s Australia as a kid. I got physically beaten up because of it.

The knuckles of a few tossers hurt, names never did.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 June 2017)

wayneL said:


> I was a Yank in 1970s Australia as a kid. I got physically beaten up because of it.




Sorry that happened to you.


----------



## basilio (5 June 2017)

That was pretty ugly Wayne. I have too many uncomfortable memories of the 60's/70's to think we lived in a golden era of tolerance and mateship. Your experience was part of a bigger picture.
_______________________________________________________________________

I can remember schools that used the strap freely and with passion. And that was with primary kids.  After our weekly spelling test Sister Borromeo would line up the students who made a mistake and administer a cut for each error. That was Grade 4.
Fights in the school yard that were never broken up by teachers because they just didn't (want to)  see them. And you didn't dare complain because 
1) Nothing serious happened to the bully
2) You copped it twice over for snitching

xoofs being routinely beaten and sometimes killed - because  that's what you did to them. Women routinely sacked when they married. Can't have a married woman taking a mans' job can you ?

Young girls routinely gang raped and being too terrified to go to a police force  and justice system that behaved like the teachers in schools who didn't want to see schoolyard fights.

Saturday afternoon VFL football and any aboriginal player was  howled at by the crowd and other players for being black. 
In 2017 we now realise that thousands of children in schools, churches, orphanages, care institutions were bashed and raped and again, no one ever saw anything. More practically no one wanted to and everyone was determined to keep their good name sacrosanct.

Perhaps the point of progress is recognising behaviour that is ugly, nasty, unfair and deciding to do something effective about it. I suggest that going back to a situation where casual abuse of people is ok is just going back to the bad old days.


----------



## pixel (5 June 2017)

basilio said:


> The point of a civil society is just that. The underlying ethos is civility.



Bas,
that's precisely what I meant to explain. When we started to focus on each individual's fragile ego and feelgood, which is the objective of helicopter parenting and cottonwool schooling, we've also ditched basic courtesy, civil behaviour, and respect for others.
Had those basic rules remained in place, there won't be much verbal abuse to speak of, and what little were occurring would run off the duck's back. If a verbal bully gets back in kind, rather than hearing his victim call for Mummy, he quickly loses interest.

So, growing a thicker skin is easier in a civil society.


----------



## pixel (5 June 2017)

basilio said:


> xoofs being routinely beaten and sometimes killed - because that's what you did to them. Women routinely sacked when they married. Can't have a married woman taking a mans' job can you ?



Bas,
Deprivation of liberty, sexual and physical assault of children as well as unconsenting adults should always have been a crime. And if people in position of authority had been listening to reports of such crimes and acted responsibly in their roles, the society in which you appear to have grown up might also have been a more humane one.

However, the things you describe have little, if anything, to do with freedom of speech. They were a sign of failed education and an uncivilised mob mentality. You can legislate against rape and murder, and every civilised society has done so. If such crimes were not reported and followed up with a conviction, officials turning a blind eye ought to be treated like common criminals and accessories. In spots - e.g. Royal Commission into Child Abuse - that seems to start happening now. Better late than never.


----------



## Tink (6 June 2017)

Pixel, I have mentioned this before.

Everyone that arrived in this country, just got on with it.
Everyone has a story to tell.

Freedom of speech was dealt with on the floor, not by governments.


----------



## PZ99 (6 June 2017)

Bring back the "beef" LOL


----------



## Tink (6 June 2017)

I didn't see any of that, PZ99.

People had disagreements, but they sorted them out.


----------



## PZ99 (6 June 2017)

I saw plenty of it in West Sydney in the 70's , 80's. 

IMV nothing has changed except for three things: a> The 21st century commoditised education system their kids are subject to culminating into the very anti social behaviour feared and avoided by previous generations.... b> The encouragement of such behaviour by the fifth estate and c> the failed politically correct methods used to discourage it.


----------



## Tink (11 June 2017)

The Stalinists at work.

Margaret Court no longer on the map.

http://www.news.com.au/sport/tennis...y/news-story/d44141e86f396b85388d6216f9eba0c5


----------



## pixel (11 June 2017)

Tink said:


> The Stalinists at work.
> 
> Margaret Court no longer on the map.
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/sport/tennis...y/news-story/d44141e86f396b85388d6216f9eba0c5



Wrong! You've fallen for an "alternative factoid".
A modicum of research would have uncovered the real fact: Some idiot hacked Google Maps and changed the name. Try it now and search "evonne goolagong arena", and this is what you'll get:


----------



## wayneL (11 June 2017)

pixel said:


> Wrong! You've fallen for an "alternative factoid".
> A modicum of research would have uncovered the real fact: Some idiot hacked Google Maps and changed the name. Try it now and search "evonne goolagong arena", and this is what you'll get:
> 
> View attachment 71504



Thanks, 

Ordinary folks should try this with many alternative factoids


----------



## orr (11 June 2017)

Six People died when Jared Loughner, of Right wing tendencies, went about his business;
We haven't seen a campaign similar to Sarah Palins  since. That's a Guilty conscience.
No alt-factoids there.


----------



## Tisme (19 June 2017)

Tink said:


> Pixel, I have mentioned this before.
> 
> Everyone that arrived in this country, just got on with it.
> Everyone has a story to tell.
> ...




They shared a common bond too:

http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/auss...11 Census - Volume II - Part VI Religions.pdf


----------



## Tink (23 June 2017)

The activists are at it again in Melbourne.

Channel 7 security breach.
Protesters scale Melbourne Building to unfurl banner.

http://www.skynews.com.au/news/nati...-unfurl-pro-refugees-banner-in-melbourne.html

------------------------------------------------

Gay marriage advocates blocked streets in Melbourne to protest against tennis great Margaret Court who was speaking at a Liberal party event.

http://www.skynews.com.au/news/national/vic/2017/06/22/gay-marriage-advocates-protest-court.html


----------



## Tink (4 December 2017)

Protestors clash at Yiannopolous event in Melbourne.

http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-...stors-clash-at-yiannopolous-event-in-vic.html

_Extra police have arrived to keep anti Milo protesters away from people queuing to get into his sold-out show in Kensington._

This is what happened in the US

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-...ce-milo-yiannopoulos-to-cancel-speech/8236550

------------------------------

_https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/the-australian-greens-party.20238/page-61_


----------



## Wysiwyg (4 December 2017)

> Yiannopolous




There is an obvious difference between trash talk and freedom of speech. Another d'head with a head full of **** and self importance that shall disappear from the public attention.


----------



## wayneL (5 December 2017)

Wysiwyg said:


> There is an obvious difference between trash talk and freedom of speech. Another d'head with a head full of **** and self importance that shall disappear from the public attention.



That's rubbish mate.  Take away the emotive tags the media and the left have used in him and most of his views are rather mainstream for those who have not become programmed into social justice warriory and thoughtless virtue signalling. 

Listen carefully,  he is part of a growing contingent of center right speakers standing up for free speech and the reclaimation of our very culture. 

You or I don't have to agree with everything,  but that does not warrant the komrades trying to shut him down. 

I personally don't like his style,  but I doff my cap at the message and agree with him on many points.


----------



## Logique (5 December 2017)

Milo Yiannopoulos is harmless, he's an entertainer, with right-of-center views. A gay man, and married to an African American partner. 

Milo is sharp._ The Project_ were too frightened to have him on. Afterwards, he called Waleed a coward. Milo doesn't toe the _luvvie_ line on feminism or Islam.

So out come the Leftist street thugs to close him down.


----------



## Tisme (5 December 2017)

wayneL said:


> That's rubbish mate.  Take away the emotive tags the media and the left have used in him and most of his views are rather mainstream for those who have not become programmed into social justice warriory and thoughtless virtue signalling.
> 
> Listen carefully,  he is part of a growing contingent of center right speakers standing up for free speech and the reclaimation of our very culture.
> 
> ...





It doesn't take even a fraction of 1% of the population who are in a constant state of self pity to fill a protest against someone who disagrees with their idea of liberal tolerance and kumbaya.

You just have to look into the crowd to see the usual suspects ... hint: if they were transposed into pre 1975 crowd gatherings you'd notice the contrast, on a 1950's crowd even moreso.


----------



## dutchie (5 December 2017)

Logique said:


> Milo Yiannopoulos is harmless, he's an entertainer, with right-of-center views. A gay man, and married to an African American partner.
> 
> Milo is sharp._ The Project_ were too frightened to have him on. Afterwards, he called Waleed a coward. Milo doesn't toe the _luvvie_ line on feminism or Islam.
> 
> So out come the Leftist street thugs to close him down.




Antifa Nazi's at it again.


----------



## basilio (5 December 2017)

Welcome Komrades to Hero Milo. The respectables of ASF salute you.. !

* Milo Yiannopoulos speaks, and Australia's respectable racists howl their approval *
The far right provocateur got what he wanted at his Melbourne show – publicity, violence and fawning attention from right-wing commentators. But his abusive style is of little use to parliamentary politicians



Far-Right activists Avi Yemini and Neil Erikson yell at Campaign Against Racism and Fascism supporters during a demonstration outside Milo Yiannopoulos’s sold out shows at the Melbourne Pavilion. Photograph: Stefan Postles/AAP

*Shares*
240

Jeff Sparrow
Monday 4 December 2017 20.37 GMT   Last modified on Monday 4 December 2017 23.27 GMT

Midway through his performance in Adelaide last Friday night, the British alt light provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos smirked as he displayed on the big screen an unflattering photo of the feminist writer Clementine Ford, snapped when she was a teenager.

The word “UNFUCKABLE” was superimposed over the top.

You’d think Yiannopoulos, of all people, would avoid making public assessments of sexual desirability, what with being caught on camera enthusing about intercourse between older men and younger boys, and then scoffing at the Left’s attitudes to this “child abuse stuff”.

Indeed, one shudders at the images Yiannopoulos might have labelled “FUCKABLE”, given his well-publicised opinions on the “arbitrary and oppressive idea of consent” (he later claimed to have been taken out of context).

On Monday night, at the first of his two Melbourne gigs, he rejigged the gag, using an image of a slightly older Ford. But the joke remained the same. Ford was unattractive. Ford was a pig. She was, he said, a “fat cxxx” – and the crowd whooped its appreciation.

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...s-australia-respectable-racists-howl-approval


----------



## Wysiwyg (5 December 2017)

wayneL said:


> That's rubbish mate.  Take away the emotive tags the media and the left have used in him and most of his views are rather mainstream for those who have not become programmed into social justice warriory and thoughtless virtue signalling.



For sure people with similar mindsets will be attracted to him.


----------



## basilio (5 December 2017)

More on Milo..

*Milo Yiannopolous, a nice warm mug of goodness me*

*http://outdonews.com/news/12157484/milo-yiannopolous-nice-warm-mug-goodness-me*


----------



## wayneL (5 December 2017)

I love how Milo is forcing the left to use the worst excesses of their putrid misrepresentation tactic and name calling to delude themselves that he is all the -isms and -phobes.

If so, just debate him instead of scurrying off into dark corners like cockroaches and baying like mongrel dogs. 

Go on, I challenge any one of you.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 December 2017)

wayneL said:


> I love how Milo is forcing the left to use the worst excesses of their putrid misrepresentation tactic and name calling to delude themselves that he is all the -isms and -phobes.
> 
> If so, just debate him instead of scurrying off into dark corners like cockroaches and baying like mongrel dogs.
> 
> Go on, I challenge any one of you.




Generally I don't think that either ultra Right or ultra Left ideologues are worth the breath debating.

People like that just don't listen to reason.


----------



## wayneL (5 December 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Generally I don't think that either ultra Right or ultra Left ideologues are worth the breath debating.
> 
> People like that just don't listen to reason.



This is the thing Horace,  they're is nothing ultra right about Milo.

A provocatuer,  yes. A white supremicist,  racist,  homophobic, misogynist,  fascist!? 

Not on your Nellie.  You're a smart man Horace,  stop uncritically swallowing the Moonbattery of the Grauniad and other left wing rags. 

I know you share some opinions bro.


----------



## basilio (5 December 2017)

Milo is just a provocatuer. He sprouts whatever nasty supremicist, racist, homophobic, misogynist, fascist dribble he needs to get the howls of approval from the people who want to hear their hatred echoed from  an attractive, sassy, take no prisoners mouthpiece.

That's why he uses pictures of  a teenage Clemintine Ford with "UNFUCKABLE" across it in his shows. 
That's why he also calls her a "fat xxxt" in his shows.  That also gets the whoops from the ferals.

His act consists of repeating back to white conservatives, in exaggerated form, what they already think.

On Monday night he called Muslims rapists and terrorists. He denounced the demographic shifts in Europe as an existential threat – London was “already gone”, he said. He mocked feminists and explained, to a chorus of approving laughter, that Aboriginal art was “crap” and “really ****”. 

He is your kind of guy Wayne. Keep him.


----------



## basilio (5 December 2017)

Anyone interested in how Milo and Steve Bannon and Briebart are constructing their Alt -Right philosophy?

* Here's How Breitbart And Milo Smuggled Nazi and White Nationalist Ideas Into The Mainstream *
A cache of documents obtained by BuzzFeed News reveals the truth about Steve Bannon’s alt-right “killing machine.”

Posted on October 6, 2017, at 8:28 a.m.



Joseph Bernstein
BuzzFeed News Reporter

Share On more More
 Share On tumblr 
*In August, after* *a white* nationalist rally in Charlottesville ended in murder, Steve Bannon insisted that "there's no room in American society" for neo-Nazis, neo-Confederates, and the KKK.

But an explosive cache of documents obtained by BuzzFeed News proves that there was plenty of room for those voices on his website.

During the 2016 presidential campaign, under Bannon’s leadership, Breitbart courted the alt-right — the insurgent, racist right-wing movement that helped sweep Donald Trump to power. The former White House chief strategist famously remarked that he wanted Breitbart to be “the platform for the alt-right.”


Josh Edelson / AFP / Getty Images
Milo Yiannopoulos at the University of California, Berkeley, on September 24.

The Breitbart employee closest to the alt-right was Milo Yiannopoulos, the site’s former tech editor known best for his outrageous public provocations, such as last year’s Dangerous Faggot speaking tour and September’s canceled Free Speech Week in Berkeley. For more than a year, Yiannopoulos led the site in a coy dance around the movement’s nastier edges, writing stories that minimized the role of neo-Nazis and white nationalists while giving its politer voices “a fair hearing.” In March, Breitbart editor Alex Marlow insisted “we’re not a hate site.” Breitbart’s media relations staff repeatedly threatened to sue outlets that described Yiannopoulos as racist. And after the violent white supremacist protest in Charlottesville, Virginia, in August, Breitbart published an article explaining that when Bannon said the site welcomed the alt-right, he was merely referring to “computer gamers and blue-collar voters who hated the GOP brand.”

These new emails and documents, however, clearly show that Breitbart does more than tolerate the most hate-filled, racist voices of the alt-right. It thrives on them, fueling and being fueled by some of the most toxic beliefs on the political spectrum — and clearing the way for them to enter the American mainstream.

It’s a relationship illustrated most starkly by a previously unreleased April 2016 video in which Yiannopoulos sings “America the Beautiful” in a Dallas karaoke bar as admirers, including the white nationalist Richard Spencer, raise their arms in Nazi salutes.

These documents chart the Breitbart alt-right universe. They reveal how the website — and, in particular, Yiannopoulos — links the Mercer family, the billionaires who fund Breitbart, to underpaid trolls who fill it with provocative content, and to extremists striving to create a white ethnostate.

They capture what Bannon calls his “killing machine” in action, as it dredges up the resentments of people around the world, sifts through these grievances for ideas and content, and propels them from the unsavory parts of the internet up to TrumpWorld, collecting advertisers’ checks all along the way.

And the cache of emails — some of the most newsworthy of which BuzzFeed News is now making public — expose the extent to which this machine depended on Yiannopoulos, who channeled voices both inside and outside the establishment into a clear narrative about the threat liberal discourse posed to America. The emails tell the story of Steve Bannon’s grand plan for Yiannopoulos, whom the Breitbart executive chairman transformed from a charismatic young editor into a conservative media star capable of magnetizing a new generation of reactionary anger. Often, the documents reveal, this anger came from a legion of secret sympathizers in Silicon Valley, Hollywood, academia, suburbia, and everywhere in between.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/josephbern...te-nationalism?utm_term=.gmXm0GVEE#.ngpRyZo44


----------



## moXJO (5 December 2017)

basilio said:


> Milo is just a provocatuer. He sprouts whatever nasty supremicist, racist, homophobic, misogynist, fascist dribble he needs to get the howls of approval from the people who want to hear their hatred echoed from  an attractive, sassy, take no prisoners mouthpiece.
> 
> That's why he uses pictures of  a teenage Clemintine Ford with "UNFUCKABLE" across it in his shows.
> That's why he also calls her a "fat xxxt" in his shows.  That also gets the whoops from the ferals.
> ...



All while leftists attacked people on the street outside  with weapons.


----------



## wayneL (5 December 2017)

Buzzfeed! LMFAO. 

The left doesn't like their own rules played back at them, hey.

Learn to enjoy it up you bas,  this is just the start.... and its clowns like you who've open Pandora's box.


----------



## qldfrog (5 December 2017)

basilio said:


> On Monday night he called Muslims rapists and terrorists. He denounced the demographic shifts in Europe as an existential threat – London was “already gone”, he said.



And anything not true in the above? Want to send your daughter to live and stay in London?Have grandchildren in western europe today? At least they will not have problem with people like me, or Wayne that is for sure!!!!!You can convert today to the religion of peace.You will be ready


----------



## Macquack (5 December 2017)

qldfrog said:


> And anything not true in the above?



Yes, the bit that suggests all muslims are rapists and terrorists.


----------



## basilio (5 December 2017)

_On Monday night he called Muslims rapists and terrorists. He denounced the demographic shifts in Europe as an existential threat – London was “already gone”, he said._

 And anything not true in the above? Want to send your daughter to live and stay in London?Have grandchildren in western europe today? At least they will not have problem with people like me, or Wayne that is for sure!!!!!You can convert today to the religion of peace.You will be ready * Mojo
*
Perhaps this exchange says it all.  One outrageous provocatour denounces 1.3  Billion men, women and children as rapists and terrorists on the basis of their religion.

As  a result 100/1000/10,000 other people accept such an outrageous statement and kick off "debate" ( _actually in fact mindless, vicious abuse _) about how our society has to protect itself from these 1.3 billion rapists and terrorists.

I suggest the language used and the mindless way it is echoed is the overwhelming problem.


----------



## greggles (5 December 2017)

As usual the far left is playing right into Milo Yiannopoulos' hands. By playing the role of thugs and violent repressors of free speech they are giving him all the publicity he craves and selling more tickets for him. Had the far left just stayed at home, the mainstream media wouldn't have given him nearly as much attention and he would have come and gone without much fanfare.

Why do the left keep shooting themselves in the foot by using violence and thuggery as a tactic? They have come off looking worse than Milo.


----------



## basilio (5 December 2017)

By the way who attacked who at the rally ?  I'd bet London to a brick it was the Alt Right thugs who started this fight.  Essentially they want to have pictures of mayhem on their website. Makes them feel/look good. Real men with bovver boots.  Of course The Hun and Murdoch Press need no excuse to damn the protesters for responding and claiming they initiated the fighting.

It will be interesting to see what police and video evidence makes of the situation.


----------



## wayneL (5 December 2017)

greggles said:


> Why do the left keep shooting themselves in the foot by using violence and thuggery as a tactic? They have come off looking worse than Milo.



Milo has a great explanation for that,  essentially, in the absence of logic,  all they have is violence and thuggery.


----------



## wayneL (5 December 2017)

Eg

http://www.news.com.au/national/nsw...s/news-story/d6d14c796368507b67edd900ed399e67

*CONTROVERSIAL British commentator Milo Yiannopoulos has been forced to ramp up security and keep the location of his Sydney show secret until the last minute after receiving multiple death threats.*

Penthouse publisher and tour promoter Damien Costas told news.com.au that Yiannopoulos and his team “know for a fact there is going to be a repeat incident” in Sydney tonight of violent clashes that took place in Melbourne yesterday. One man has already been arrested outside the event at Le Montage in Lilyfield, about 6.15pm. It is unknown if he has been charged.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 December 2017)

It sounds like Milo is a shoe-in for Donald Trumps next Immigration Secretary.


----------



## moXJO (5 December 2017)

basilio said:


> By the way who attacked who at the rally ?  I'd bet London to a brick it was the Alt Right thugs who started this fight.  Essentially they want to have pictures of mayhem on their website. Makes them feel/look good. Real men with bovver boots.  Of course The Hun and Murdoch Press need no excuse to damn the protesters for responding and claiming they initiated the fighting.
> 
> It will be interesting to see what police and video evidence makes of the situation.



E


basilio said:


> By the way who attacked who at the rally ?  I'd bet London to a brick it was the Alt Right thugs who started this fight.  Essentially they want to have pictures of mayhem on their website. Makes them feel/look good. Real men with bovver boots.  Of course The Hun and Murdoch Press need no excuse to damn the protesters for responding and claiming they initiated the fighting.
> 
> It will be interesting to see what police and video evidence makes of the situation.



Yeah well you would bet wrong.
Left attacked the right. And were then arrested.
Bring a stick to bash your opponents says it all doesn't it. That same guy has been violent at a few protests.


basilio said:


> By the way who attacked who at the rally ?  I'd bet London to a brick it was the Alt Right thugs who started this fight.  Essentially they want to have pictures of mayhem on their website. Makes them feel/look good. Real men with bovver boots.  Of course The Hun and Murdoch Press need no excuse to damn the protesters for responding and claiming they initiated the fighting.
> 
> It will be interesting to see what police and video evidence makes of the situation.



wrong again.
It was the left who instigated.


----------



## wayneL (6 December 2017)

Yep is was your Komrades bas. 


http://www.news.com.au/national/nsw...t/news-story/439b7e5a6670f75661e940c9529cd572

  RIGHT-wing activist Avi Yemini has described what he claims really happened during the violent clashes outside Milo Yiannopoulos’ event in Melbourne, saying Australia is in the middle of a “war on freedom of speech.”

The conservative activist and former Israeli soldier took to his Facebook page to post an eight minute video about protests a night earlier that left an police officer with minor injuries after being hit by a rock.

The man who describes himself as a “proud ozraeli” said he was compelled to share his thoughts after seeing media coverage of the event.

“You had a small group of pro-Milo supporters. People who are standing up for freedom of speech. People who are proudly announcing that they are Aussies. You don’t have to agree with all their different schtick,” he said.

“But then you had a massive crowd surrounding the maybe 50 pro-Milo supporters. You had a massive crowd of hundreds ... You had Antifa with their face coverings, you had Muslim women in burkas ... throwing their middle fingers up and calling me a Nazi.”

“Guys this is a war on freedom of speech, there is no two sides here.”


----------



## Tisme (6 December 2017)

He's not "right" enough for me, he's a homo to start with


----------



## SirRumpole (6 December 2017)

basilio said:


> I suggest the language used and the mindless way it is echoed is the overwhelming problem.




Agreed. It's possible to argue rationally about terrorism, religion, immigration etc without stirring people up into a frenzy. 

I'm prepared to listen to any argument reasonably expressed and empirically validated, but when it comes to banal  rabble rousing the brain turns off.


----------



## Tisme (6 December 2017)

basilio said:


> Milo is just a provocatuer. He sprouts whatever nasty supremicist, racist, homophobic, misogynist, fascist dribble he needs to get the howls of approval from the people who want to hear their hatred echoed from  an attractive, sassy, take no prisoners mouthpiece.
> 
> That's why he uses pictures of  a teenage Clemintine Ford with "UNFUCKABLE" across it in his shows.
> That's why he also calls her a "fat xxxt" in his shows.  That also gets the whoops from the ferals.
> ...




After having being exposed to my miscreant humour for some time now, I would have thought you would be able to recognise his similar brand and discriminate between the sublime and the ridiculous.  

His message is pretty sound though. For too long the agenda has been skewed to accommodate those who aren't talented at the expense of those who are. We are stagnating in favour of a giant global  socialist kibbutz

The time has arrived when that 20% of the world's clever people now want to take back what they donoted over the last 3 decades to the lethargic and beige 80%.


----------



## basilio (6 December 2017)

Tisme said:


> After having being exposed to my miscreant humour for some time now, I would have thought you would be able to recognise his similar brand and discriminate between the sublime and the ridiculous.
> 
> His message is pretty sound though. For too long the agenda has been skewed to accommodate those who aren't talented at the expense of those who are. We are stagnating in favour of a giant global  socialist kibbutz
> 
> The time has arrived when that 20% of the world's clever people now want to take back what they donoted over the last 3 decades to the lethargic and beige 80%.




I have well recognised your "miscreant" humour Tisme.  In fact I've seen it a number of times in the schools I have been a teacher. 

There were always the nasty smart alecs. The ones who thought it was fun to terrorise the younger kids by pinching their bags, or clothes, getting them into trouble, needling them, just making life miserable for others because they thought that was fun. But it was always with a smile, a lilt, a laugh.  It was just a joke wasn't it ? Long term, low/mid level bullying by intelligent, nasty people with connections.

They were always a tough one to handle. Talks, more talks, detentions, long periods in the DP's office. 

In the end we sometimes had to have serious conversations with parents and say their precious petal wasn't using our schools educational facilities to his/her best advantage and that another institution would be more appropriate. We only had to do that with a couple of the ring leaders to pull the others into line and restore a school culture that was respectful of everyone. But sometimes it had to be done.

Alternatively we turned a blind eye when the the poor worms turned and gave the nasty, smart alecs the almighty hiding we as staff couldn't administer.


----------



## Logique (6 December 2017)

Milo Y. is a latter day variation on Sir Les Patterson or Kath and Kim, or Julian Clary. He's harmless entertainment. For those with the wit to perceive it.

The 'street Left' over-reacted and made themselves look silly. They should lighten up a bit, for goodness sake. Milo played them like a fiddle.

Yours in lethargy and beigeness,
Logique


----------



## Tisme (7 December 2017)

Logique said:


> Milo Y. is a latter day variation on Sir Les Patterson or Kath and Kim, or Julian Clary. He's harmless entertainment. For those with the wit to perceive it.
> 
> The 'street Left' over-reacted and made themselves look silly. They should lighten up a bit, for goodness sake. Milo played them like a fiddle.
> 
> ...




He was on the radio this morning saying pretty much that. He can't help but thank the protesters for the free publicity and that they are welcome to come to the show for some laughs instead the moribund faces they usually display.


----------



## Tisme (7 December 2017)

Besties


----------



## PZ99 (7 December 2017)

Feel sorry for John Howard after seeing that pic. All he got was a handshake.


----------



## Tink (1 March 2018)

*Protesters storm the Rare Steakhouse in Melbourne.*
January 30, 2018

_Customers at a steakhouse in the Melbourne CBD were disrupted on Saturday night as a group of animal rights activists stormed the restaurant.

Thirty-five members of the Melbourne Cow Save Animal Liberation Army forced their way into the Rare Steakhouse at around 6.30pm, chanting slogans, standing around tables and holding signs up against windows in an attempt to “speak up for animals where their dead bodies were being consumed.”

In a video posted to the group’s Facebook page, the group can be seen lining the restaurant with customers continuing to eat their dinner despite the demonstration, several bewildered diners reaching for their phones to film the scenes for themselves.

“In order to create change in our society, we must challenge current belief systems and force people to take a side; oppression or justice, cruelty or compassion,” the group wrote on Facebook.

“There is no humane way to kill someone who does not want to die.

“Always speak up loud and strong for those sentient beings who are oppressed. They need us to.”

Restaurant management called police, who reached the premises and ended the demonstration. It remains unclear why this specific restaurant was targeted, with the chain boasting of its “sustainable farming practices” on its website.

A Victoria Police spokesperson said: “Police attended a protest on King St about 7pm on 27 January. 

Protesters left the premises peacefully when asked to do so by the managers of the venue. There were no arrests and no injuries.”_

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/ne...e/news-story/aa3528ff30b7c5224332c9c438debf34

------------------------------

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/religion-is-crazy.11201/page-229


----------



## Tink (4 May 2018)

*Vegan activists storm Melbourne Myer cosmetic department*

_A group of vocal vegans have stormed the cosmetics department of Myer's Melbourne CBD store to protest against the testing of beauty products on animals.

About 100 animal welfare advocates disrupted the Bourke Street store on Sunday afternoon bearing signs that proclaimed "It's not beauty, it's violence" and "Beauty is pain".

"We don't need to harm animals to live healthy and happy lives," vegan group Direct Action Everywhere's Joanne Lee told AAP.

"We're now entering an era where there's a lot of information out there that supports a vegan life."

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/activis...osmetics-department-to-protest-animal-testing

--------------------

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/animal-rights-and-ethical-food-production.33823/

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/the-australian-greens-party.20238/page-71_


----------



## TikoMike (7 May 2018)

For those that are interested, Day For Freedom event in London yesterday. A huge turnout with some big names among the conservatives.

Worth a watch if you're sick of seeing things censored and labeled as "hate speech" by the left for speaking conservative political views, saying "offensive" jokes by comedians and saying views opposing Islam.


----------



## Tisme (8 May 2018)

TikoMike said:


> For those that are interested, Day For Freedom event in London yesterday. A huge turnout with some big names among the conservatives.
> 
> Worth a watch if you're sick of seeing things censored and labeled as "hate speech" by the left for speaking conservative political views, saying "offensive" jokes by comedians and saying views opposing Islam.




They are wasting their time. The lunatics are in charge of the asylum and it's going to take more than conservatives to turn it around......... it will take the marxists waking up to the vandalism they have rort on western civilisation .... China rules here we come.


----------



## TikoMike (26 May 2018)

Welcome to Orwell's 1984, the thought police has now become a reality. This man, Tommy Robinson, arrested and immediately sent to jail for 13 months. He will most likely die in jail, similar to the man who went to jail after throwing bacon at a mosque.

All Tommy was doing was reporting on a rape gang case (all the details of this case were made available to public).

 

Skip to the end if you want to see the arrest.


----------



## CanOz (26 May 2018)

Not exactly you're every day reporter though....

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Robinson_(activist)


----------



## moXJO (26 May 2018)

In 2011 this guy helped stop people's right to march



> *It is right to ban the English Defence League's march*
> Lutfur Rahman




In 2018 he is done for corruption



> The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) has published its ruling in a case that saw former Tower Hamlets mayor Lutfur Rahman struck off after he was found guilty of election fraud.
> 
> Rahman, a family law specialist, was found guilty by an election court in April 2015 of engaging in corrupt and illegal practices during his 2014 re-election campaign for the London Borough of Tower Hamlets. The election result was voided and Rahman was banned from standing for public office for five years.


----------



## TikoMike (26 May 2018)

moXJO said:


> In 2011 this guy helped stop people's right to march




Are you talking about Tommy? So by that logic why isn't ANTIFA arrested? 



CanOz said:


> Not exactly you're every day reporter though....
> 
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Robinson_(activist)




He speaks his mind about patriotism, conservatism and issues with Islam. There's a lot of propaganda being written about him as he is one of the loudest. That video, without a doubt, shows that Freedom of Speech is under attack via their definition of "hate speech" or "disturbing the peace" as through that whole video I cannot see what he has done wrong.


----------



## moXJO (26 May 2018)

TikoMike said:


> Are you talking about Tommy? So by that logic why isn't ANTIFA arrested?
> 
> 
> 
> He speaks his mind about patriotism, conservatism and issues with Islam. There's a lot of propaganda being written about him as he is one of the loudest. That video, without a doubt, shows that Freedom of Speech is under attack via their definition of "hate speech" or "disturbing the peace" as through that whole video I cannot see what he has done wrong.



No Lutfur Rahman


----------



## wayneL (27 May 2018)

If the TR situation doesn't blow up in their faces, I'm afraid the Uk is lost to the Orwellians. Scarily,  this is the direction Oz is also heading. 

So glad I never had children.


----------



## dutchie (28 May 2018)

First they came for Tommy Robinson.........
Then they came for you..........


----------



## dutchie (29 May 2018)

Tommy Robinson has been arrested and sentenced on trumped up bull**** (disturbing the peace et al).
Read about what Tommy is trying to report about. If you have children - be very afraid (it's a global epidemic not just confined to the UK).
It's happening now and can only get worse unless Tommy and others like him can educate you (because the MSM won't).
His arrest and rapid sentencing in itself is unjust (I can't believe that this is happening in the UK - previously a bastion of freedom and free speech) but one of the *horrific *aspects of this case is that there is a total ban on reporting the event (and issues).
This shows the control that governments have and are willing to exercise.
Very soon this will come to Australia and ASF will not be allowed to put up these posts.


----------



## Tisme (29 May 2018)

dutchie said:


> Very soon this will come to Australia and ASF will not be allowed to put up these posts.




Draconian laws are inevitable when fifth columnists have too much of a voice and sympathy from nanny state lefties or opportunistic working class hating right wing legislators...... an unedifying set of bookends.  

Freedom of expression is heavily skewed in favour of the victim mentality people these days and now the barbarians have been let through the gates, multicultural societies must now pander to them to avoid revenge terrorism. We changed our laws to accommodate alien cultures and norms and we will reap the misery it brings.


----------



## TikoMike (29 May 2018)

wayneL said:


> If the TR situation doesn't blow up in their faces, I'm afraid the Uk is lost to the Orwellians. Scarily,  this is the direction Oz is also heading.
> 
> So glad I never had children.



If Tommy dies in jail, I think **** will hit the fan.


----------



## dutchie (29 May 2018)

Please watch all of this, as Australia will be next.


----------



## Tisme (29 May 2018)

dutchie said:


> Please watch all of this, as Australia will be next.





What's the idea of introducing common sense and observation into the argument? Surely you could have found something less Anglocentric and more pro primitives?


----------



## wayneL (29 May 2018)

dutchie said:


> Please watch all of this, as Australia will be next.




The "Traitor Class".

What a so very apt phrase.


----------



## Tisme (29 May 2018)

wayneL said:


> The "Traitor Class".
> 
> What a so very apt phrase.



"
_I feel strongly about labelling products for what they are. Poison should be labelled as poison; treason should be labelled as treason; truth should be labelled as truth; lies should be labelled as lies._

From _McCarthyism: The Fight for America_, by Senator Joe McCarthy"


----------



## TikoMike (29 May 2018)

This also happened a day or so before Tommy's arrest. A woman questioning why Muslims are allowed to pray in the park when other religions can't, why they get special treatment and why the police officer aren't doing their job. At a later time they come knocking on her door, she freaks out and gets paranoid but ends up opening it anyway, they shove her to the ground and arrest her.

Some Orwellian stuff going on in the UK at the moment.


----------



## cynic (29 May 2018)

Out of interest, does anybody know what percentage of the English voting populace, were drinking the "social equity" "kool aid" during recent decades?

Could there, perchance, be a causal correlation?!!

If so, what might this say about Australia's current trajectory?


----------



## dutchie (30 May 2018)

ABC reports on Tommy's arrest (thanks Tink):

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-30/far-right-activist-tommy-robinson-jailed/9814524

But I would not class Tommy  "far right" at moment, although he may have been in the past.
Now he is a reporting on matters that the MSM are too scared to report on - (Islamic rape gangs).


----------



## basilio (30 May 2018)

dutchie said:


> BC reports on Tommy's arrest (thanks Tink):
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-30/far-right-activist-tommy-robinson-jailed/9814524




Good find. So Stephen Laxley-Lennon already has one suspended contempt of court charge for live broadcasting a previous rape trial which is forbidden because :
1) It threatens the impartiality of the jury
2) He made up stuff about the defendents anyway

So he does exactly the same thing again and the Judge decides he clearly doesn't understand the law or the consequences of deliberate contempt of court and will be treated accordingly.

Good luck Stephen. Best of Karma to you.  Perhaps a few of your supporters can tak up live broadcasting of trials and give you support inthe pen.


----------



## basilio (30 May 2018)

Tisme said:


> "
> _I feel strongly about labelling products for what they are. Poison should be labelled as poison; treason should be labelled as treason; truth should be labelled as truth; lies should be labelled as lies._
> 
> From _McCarthyism: The Fight for America_, by Senator Joe McCarthy"




So Tisme.. you reckon Senator Joe McCarthy was OK?  Exactly how many lies did the good Senator manufacture in his particular reign ?


----------



## moXJO (30 May 2018)

basilio said:


> So Tisme.. you reckon Senator Joe McCarthy was OK?  Exactly how many lies did the good Senator manufacture in his particular reign ?



You sure you want to tar someone else for manufacturing lies


----------



## basilio (30 May 2018)

moXJO said:


> You sure you want to tar someone else for manufacturing lies




*McCarthyism*
American history
Written By:

Paul J. Achter
See Article History
*McCarthyism*, name given to the period of time in American history that saw Wisconsin Sen. Joseph McCarthy produce a series of investigations and hearings during the 1950s in an effort to expose supposed communist infiltration of various areas of the U.S. government. The term has since become a byname for defamation of character or reputation by means of widely publicized indiscriminate allegations, especially on the basis of unsubstantiated charges.

McCarthy was elected to the Senate in 1946 and rose to prominence in 1950 when he claimed in a speech that 205 communists had infiltrated the State Department. McCarthy’s subsequent search for communists in the Central Intelligence Agency, the State Department, and elsewhere made him an incredibly polarizing figure. After McCarthy’s reelection in 1952, he obtained the chairmanship of the Committee on Government Operations of the Senate and of its Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. For the next two years he was constantly in the spotlight, investigating various government departments and questioning innumerable witnesses about their suspected communist affiliations.* Although he failed to make a plausible case against anyone, his colourful and cleverly presented accusations drove some persons out of their jobs and brought popular condemnation to others.*

https://www.britannica.com/topic/McCarthyism


----------



## cynic (30 May 2018)

basilio said:


> Good find. So Stephen Laxley-Lennon already has one suspended contempt of court charge for live broadcasting a previous rape trial which is forbidden because :
> 1) It threatens the impartiality of the jury
> 2) He made up stuff about the defendents anyway
> 
> ...



Your expressed concern for testimonial and judicial integrity is most refreshing.

Does this mean that you now revoke, your expressed support for the unlawful behaviour of certain activists, in years gone by?


----------



## SirRumpole (30 May 2018)

basilio said:


> McCarthy was elected to the Senate in 1946 and rose to prominence in 1950 when he claimed in a speech that 205 communists had infiltrated the State Department. McCarthy’s subsequent search for communists in the Central Intelligence Agency, the State Department, and elsewhere made him an incredibly polarizing figure.




Considering recent disclosures regarding political influence peddling by a great and powerful nation to our North, MacCarthy's concerns about Communist infiltration may be justified here and now


----------



## dutchie (30 May 2018)

Gag order on Tommy's case lifted in UK.


----------



## basilio (30 May 2018)

dutchie said:


> Gag order on Tommy's case lifted in UK.



About time.  That wasn't a good idea.

I think people needed to know exactly why Stephen Laxley-Lennon was sentenced to jail for contempt of court. Look forward to hearing about his life inside. It'll make a man out of him I reckon...


----------



## moXJO (30 May 2018)

basilio said:


> .* Although he failed to make a plausible case against anyone, his colourful and cleverly presented accusations drove some persons out of their jobs and brought popular condemnation to others.*



Oh the sweet irony.


----------



## wayneL (30 May 2018)

basilio said:


> About time.  That wasn't a good idea.
> 
> I think people needed to know exactly why Stephen Laxley-Lennon was sentenced to jail for contempt of court. Look forward to hearing about his life inside. It'll make a man out of him I reckon...



So courageous of you from behind the anonymity of your nom de plume basilio.

Yell you what,  Id pay to see you and Tommy,  you,  know,  man to man.


----------



## basilio (30 May 2018)

Really ! And what is this "Tommy Robinson " rot. *His name is Stephen Laxley- Lennon*.  Tommy is just is stage name when he's flying the flag  of freedom and leading his band of merry fascists to flog a few more Islamic barbarians.

And yes Stephen does have plenty of form for assault so I'm sure we could have a right royal dust up. It's a good thing he is going to safely behind bars isn't it . Otherwise he might get hurt.

Anyway the Karma bus is ready and rolling. Let's see where it lands. We can only hope that real justice prevails.


----------



## wayneL (30 May 2018)

Ah yes,  and basilio is your real name isnt it.

And for the record my name is a matter of public record here and Ill tell it to anyone who wants to know. 

Have you  got the the cajones tough boy?


----------



## wayneL (30 May 2018)

And oh yes, Karma. It's a real bitch Mr Anonymous, Mr "smear and not debate".

It's going to get really interesting who that bus ultimately runs over. I can't wait.


----------



## Tisme (31 May 2018)

wayneL said:


> So courageous of you from behind the anonymity of your nom de plume basilio.
> 
> Yell you what,  Id pay to see you and Tommy,  you,  know,  man to man.




My guess is one of them would run off and complain to event organiser of being picked on.


----------



## dutchie (31 May 2018)

FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS THE MOST IMPORTANT CONSTITUENT OF OUR LIVES

It is slowly being eroded by our governments. We need to stop the rot.

Free Speech Rallies in Melbourne Sydney Brisbane and Perth

9 / 10  JUNE


----------



## basilio (31 May 2018)

wayneL said:


> Ah yes,  and basilio is your real name isnt it.
> 
> And for the record my name is a matter of public record here and Ill tell it to anyone who wants to know.
> 
> Have you  got the the cajones tough boy?




Is that a threat ?


----------



## basilio (31 May 2018)

wayneL said:


> And oh yes, Karma. It's a real bitch Mr Anonymous, Mr "smear and not debate".
> 
> It's going to get really interesting who that bus ultimately runs over. I can't wait.




Or is that a "threat" ?
Or just the normal fun comments we make on this lovely, warm, pleasant little forum.


----------



## wayneL (31 May 2018)

basilio said:


> Is that a threat ?



Oh please. 

It is an invitation to you,  in light of your pedagogery regarding Tommy's real name,  to reveal your real name. 

You know,  to mitigate your monumental hypocrisy.


----------



## wayneL (31 May 2018)

basilio said:


> Or is that a "threat" ?
> Or just the normal fun comments we make on this lovely, warm, pleasant little forum.



Threats are for the left basilio. I leave the karma bus to its own device.  I will merely be an interested observer.


----------



## basilio (31 May 2018)

wayneL said:


> Oh please.
> 
> It is an invitation to you,  in light of your pedagogery regarding Tommy's real name,  to reveal your real name.
> 
> You know,  to mitigate your monumental hypocrisy.




Nah. Just don't buy it Wayne.  Just... not... true.
I've heard a thousand snide comments from school bullies intended to put the frighteners on their next pet project (true !) to recognise menace when I hear it.


----------



## dutchie (31 May 2018)

basilio said:


> Or is that a "threat" ?
> Or just the normal fun comments we make on this lovely, warm, pleasant little forum.



I think it's a racist, homophobic, fascist threat.


----------



## dutchie (31 May 2018)

basilio said:


> Is that a threat ?




Don't come along with that sort of sh@t.


----------



## wayneL (31 May 2018)

basilio said:


> Nah. Just don't buy it Wayne.  Just... not... true.
> I've heard a thousand snide comments from school bullies intended to put the frighteners on their next pet project (true !) to recognise menace when I hear it.



I think the basilio is actually Cathy Newman. 

She is a only person I've seen to do transparently and shamelessly transmogrify a perfectly innocent comment into a perfectly ludicrous smear not related to the original comment. 

Actually,  no,  they all do that don't they?


----------



## Tisme (31 May 2018)

wayneL said:


> I think the basilio is actually Cathy Newman.
> 
> She is a only person I've seen to do transparently and shamelessly transmogrify a perfectly innocent comment into a perfectly ludicrous smear not related to the original comment.
> 
> Actually,  no,  they all do that don't they?





If only my gag order could be lifted


----------



## basilio (31 May 2018)

wayneL said:


> a perfectly innocent comment




Yep .  "But I ain't said Nuthing Sir.  Ya can't prove anthink. "
Wrap it up will you Wayne. "Tommy Robinson"  is a very public figure with a cause to push. I can totally understand the use of a different, more "English" name than Stephem Laxley-Lennon. Lots of people in the public eye create new names to assist heir image.

But Stephen/Tommys desire to be a public figure has nothing to do with my or anyone elses privacy on this forum.  Trying to bait or insult me because I won't expose myself here is not on.  

The issue of the conversation was  whether Tommy was being denied his freedom of speech by interviewing defendents in a trial  for Face Book while the trial was still in progress. The facts are "Freedom of Speech" is not absolute or sacrostant.  The Judiciary system says clearly the rights of people to a fair trial take precedence while the trail is progress. Tommy has already had a run in for attempting to undermine that right in a previous trial. He has done it again and the court has said "enough is enough", he is in contempt of court and this is the penalty.


----------



## moXJO (31 May 2018)

basilio said:


> Yep .  "But I ain't said Nuthing Sir.  Ya can't prove anthink. "
> Wrap it up will you Wayne. "Tommy Robinson"  is a very public figure with a cause to push. I can totally understand the use of a different, more "English" name than Stephem Laxley-Lennon. Lots of people in the public eye create new names to assist heir image.
> 
> But Stephen/Tommys desire to be a public figure has nothing to do with my or anyone elses privacy on this forum.  Trying to bait or insult me because I won't expose myself here is not on.
> ...



Can someone clarify the actual law of media and law cases. I know certain cases have media gag orders to prevent the victim being identified. But there are plenty of cases where the media chase those accused while at trial.

Wouldn't the chasing and outing of Harvey Weinstein in the media prejudice the case? 
Or will that be judge not jury?


----------



## SirRumpole (31 May 2018)

moXJO said:


> But there are plenty of cases where the media chase those accused while at trial.




Cardinal Pell ?


----------



## Tisme (31 May 2018)

moXJO said:


> Can someone clarify the actual law of media and law cases. I know certain cases have media gag orders to prevent the victim being identified. But there are plenty of cases where the media chase those accused while at trial.
> 
> Wouldn't the chasing and outing of Harvey Weinstein in the media prejudice the case?
> Or will that be judge not jury?




We've got our own mouth who was pinged and now warms his bum on a Senate seat.


----------



## wayneL (31 May 2018)

basilio said:


> Yep .  "But I ain't said Nuthing Sir.  Ya can't prove anthink. "
> Wrap it up will you Wayne. "Tommy Robinson"  is a very public figure with a cause to push. I can totally understand the use of a different, more "English" name than Stephem Laxley-Lennon. Lots of people in the public eye create new names to assist heir image.
> 
> But Stephen/Tommys desire to be a public figure has nothing to do with my or anyone elses privacy on this forum.  Trying to bait or insult me because I won't expose myself here is not on.
> ...



Oh dear,  

You missed the point I was making (in the midst of trying to slur my intention). Tommy started using his nom de plume to try to protect his family,  much the same reason you want to maintain your anonymity here. 

Fair enough I say,  but I think I adequately exposed your hypocrisy on this point. So,  I won't wrap it up and you can get stuffed, bas.

Re the imprisonment of Tommy,  I just got off the phone from a client of mine who is a retired QC.  He has been following the case but wouldn't be drawn on it until everything is known.  He did make the point that there are several irregularities that he would like to follow up and that the guilty plea sounded suspiciously like a "plea bargain", to use the american phrase. 

Stay tuned for that.


----------



## basilio (31 May 2018)

Why not check out this analysis on the contempt of court charge against Tommy ?

*Don't call it censorship when Islam critic's simply in contempt of court*
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/...contempt-of-court/.../680754cc4a98167fa75ba4afcf...
2 days ago - “Why aren't you defending _Tommy Robinson_?” asked many readers last weekend. The answer is simple: sometimes this British political activist ...


----------



## wayneL (31 May 2018)

basilio said:


> Why not check out this analysis on the contempt of court charge against Tommy ?
> 
> *Don't call it censorship when Islam critic's simply in contempt of court*
> https://www.theaustralian.com.au/...contempt-of-court/.../680754cc4a98167fa75ba4afcf...
> 2 days ago - “Why aren't you defending _Tommy Robinson_?” asked many readers last weekend. The answer is simple: sometimes this British political activist ...



I will perform my own analysis when everything is known thank you (with the help of some pretty high brow legal opinion) 

It is quite probable that to the letter of the law,  he is in contempt,  but then on that basis,  so are most of the press. 

Like my client said...  Irregularities bro.


----------



## Tisme (31 May 2018)

"British judge laughs as police arrest Tommy Robinson"


----------



## wayneL (31 May 2018)

Tisme said:


> "British judge laughs as police arrest Tommy Robinson"
> 
> View attachment 87592



This is one of the many "irregularities" my retired qc friend mentioned. This makes the magistrate both witness and judicial. This is problematic.


----------



## basilio (31 May 2018)

Tisme said:


> "British judge laughs as police arrest Tommy Robinson"
> 
> View attachment 87592




I can see three people looking out the window. Can anyone see them laughing ?

(Or is that just a useful inflammatory tag for the picture ?)


----------



## PZ99 (31 May 2018)

They look like window cleaners to me


----------



## Tisme (31 May 2018)

PZ99 said:


> They look like window cleaners to me




Yeah their supercilious laughter enraged a few on the ground.


----------



## PZ99 (31 May 2018)

They must be the right wingers w*r*ingers then.... after all, only the left are capable of rage


----------



## Tisme (31 May 2018)

PZ99 said:


> They must be the right wingers w*r*ingers then.... after all, only the left are capable of rage




Probably snowflakes


----------



## dutchie (31 May 2018)

The laughing Judge will enable Tommy to get off the sentence on appeal.


----------



## PZ99 (31 May 2018)

Yep.... laughing is an offense in this 21st century PC world.


----------



## Tisme (31 May 2018)

I reckon there will be at least one member here who will be happy to lead Sonya to the gallows:



> Please Show your Support for SONIA KRUGER ...... She's Entitled to voice her opinion ...... OUR #FreedomOfSpeech is being replaced by Blasphemy Laws
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## SirRumpole (31 May 2018)

Tisme said:


> I reckon there will be at least one member here who will be happy to lead Sonya to the gallows:




Yep, that's where we are at, prosecuted for expressing an opinion.


----------



## basilio (1 June 2018)

Where the True Trolls Troll...  Lot's to learn in this interview.

*Trump’s Right-Hand Troll*
Stephen Miller once tormented liberals at Duke. Now the president’s speechwriter and immigration enforcer is deploying the art of provocation from the White House.





Photo illustration by WG600*


McKay Coppins
May 28, 2018
It’s late on a Friday afternoon in March, and I’m sitting across from Stephen Miller in his spacious, sunlit West Wing office, trying to figure out whether he’s trolling me.

This is no easy task. A provocateur as skilled as Miller doesn’t just announce when he’s saying something outlandish to get a rise out of you—he tries to make you think he means it. So you have to look for the subtle tells. The fleeting half-smirk when he refers to himself as a “conservative social-justice warrior” early in the conversation. The too-emphatic tone he takes later when he says the best movie he’s seen in the past 15 years is _The Dark Knight Rises_, and then chides you for not properly appreciating its commentary on the French Revolution.

“It takes on the issue of anarchy and social breakdown in a really interesting way,” he says of the Batman movie. “There’s a lot going on in the film that you, of all people, I’d have thought would be all over.”

“Me … _specifically_?,” I ask, taking the bait.

“_Well_,” he replies, letting the mask slip and a sarcastic grin surface, “it’s just your reputation as a very deep thinker.”
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/05/stephen-miller-trump-adviser/561317/


----------



## SirRumpole (1 June 2018)

basilio said:


> Where the True Trolls Troll...  Lot's to learn in this interview.




I think he may be on this site.


----------



## bellenuit (1 June 2018)

Probably the most balanced and comprehensive report I have seen yet on the Tommy Robinson issue.

*Tommy Robinson Drew Attention to ‘Grooming Gangs.’ Britain Has Persecuted Him.*

*https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/tommy-robinson-grooming-gangs-britain-persecutes-journalist*


----------



## dutchie (1 June 2018)

bellenuit said:


> Probably the most balanced and comprehensive report I have seen yet on the Tommy Robinson issue.
> 
> *Tommy Robinson Drew Attention to ‘Grooming Gangs.’ Britain Has Persecuted Him.*
> 
> *https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/tommy-robinson-grooming-gangs-britain-persecutes-journalist*




The problem — as I said in 2015 — is that any challenge Robinson presents is all a secondary issue. *The primary issue is that for years the British state allowed gangs of men to rape thousands of young girls across Britain. For years the police, politicians, Crown Prosecution Service, and every other arm of the state ostensibly dedicated to protecting these girls failed them.* As a number of government inquires have concluded, they turned their face away from these girls because they were terrified of the accusations of racism that would come their way if they did address them. They decided it wasn’t worth the aggravation.

By contrast, Tommy Robinson thought it was worth the aggravation, even if that meant having his whole life turned upside down. Some years ago, after crawling over all of his personal affairs and the affairs of all his immediate family, the police found an irregularity on a mortgage application, prosecuted Robinson, convicted him, and sent him to prison on that charge. In prison he was assaulted and almost killed by Muslim inmates.

Tommy Robinson will be in prison for another year. And all those people happy with the status quo will breathe a sigh of relief.

What can be said with absolute certainty is that Tommy Robinson has been treated with greater suspicion and a greater presumption of guilt by the United Kingdom than any Islamic extremist or mass rapist ever has been. That should be — yet is not — a national scandal. If even one mullah or sheikh had been treated with the presumption of guilt that Robinson has received, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the rest of them would be all over the U.K. authorities. But different standards apply to Robinson.


my bolds


----------



## Tisme (1 June 2018)

dutchie said:


> The problem — as I said in 2015 — is that any challenge Robinson presents is all a secondary issue. *The primary issue is that for years the British state allowed gangs of men to rape thousands of young girls across Britain. For years the police, politicians, Crown Prosecution Service, and every other arm of the state ostensibly dedicated to protecting these girls failed them.* As a number of government inquires have concluded, they turned their face away from these girls because they were terrified of the accusations of racism that would come their way if they did address them. They decided it wasn’t worth the aggravation.
> 
> By contrast, Tommy Robinson thought it was worth the aggravation, even if that meant having his whole life turned upside down. Some years ago, after crawling over all of his personal affairs and the affairs of all his immediate family, the police found an irregularity on a mortgage application, prosecuted Robinson, convicted him, and sent him to prison on that charge. In prison he was assaulted and almost killed by Muslim inmates.
> 
> ...





Still more majestic shalt thou rise,
More dreadful, from each foreign stroke;
As the loud blast that tears the skies,
Serves but to root thy native oak.
"Rule, Britannia! rule the waves:
*"Britons never will be slaves."
*
James Thomson got that wrong


----------



## moXJO (2 June 2018)

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidan...tions-and-restrictions-public-access-hearings

All the laws and legal stuff here.


----------



## basilio (2 June 2018)

moXJO said:


> https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidan...tions-and-restrictions-public-access-hearings
> 
> All the laws and legal stuff here.




Good find. Worth a read.

It's quite clear that "Tommy"  was aware that he shouldn't be attempting to "live broadcast" the trial while it was still running (and had been warned and convicted of a similar action earlier).  Of course this won't make any difference to the mob baying "Freedom of Speech" and demanding his release.


----------



## moXJO (2 June 2018)

I suppose if he wanted to do it he would need a sketch artist to reveal their faces like they do on the news.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 June 2018)

basilio said:


> Good find. Worth a read.
> 
> It's quite clear that "Tommy"  was aware that he shouldn't be attempting to "live broadcast" the trial while it was still running (and had been warned and convicted of a similar action earlier).  Of course this won't make any difference to the mob baying "Freedom of Speech" and demanding his release.




I think the main point here is that he was sent to gaol because *in the opinion of a judge *he was in contempt of court.

No trial, no legal defence, no opportunity to argue his case, no judgement by his peers.

Arbitrary imprisonment is a contravention of an individual's rights.


----------



## wayneL (2 June 2018)

basilio said:


> Good find. Worth a read.
> 
> It's quite clear that "Tommy"  was aware that he shouldn't be attempting to "live broadcast" the trial while it was still running (and had been warned and convicted of a similar action earlier).  Of course this won't make any difference to the mob baying "Freedom of Speech" and demanding his release.



Live broadcasting the trial? 

You might want to revise as that is not accurate, notwithstanding other possible issues, not a foot was placed on court property.

I understand there is going to be some sort of "appeal" or challenge for want of a better word,  so we will all need to stay tuned for that. 

By the way,  that "baying mob" are mostly moderate middle and working class people sick of what is happening to their country.


----------



## moXJO (2 June 2018)

wayneL said:


> Live broadcasting the trial?
> 
> You might want to revise as that is not accurate, notwithstanding other possible issues, not a foot was placed on court property.
> 
> ...



I think I read that you can't film in any way to prejudice the case.
The other thing is the innocent till proven guilty.

If they had been found guilty he could release footage possibly(appeals)?

I don't like what they did to Tommy. But surely someone could have told him don't film.


----------



## wayneL (2 June 2018)

moXJO said:


> I think I read that you can't film in any way to prejudice the case.
> The other thing is the innocent till proven guilty.
> 
> If they had been found guilty he could release footage possibly(appeals)?
> ...



My barrister friend says it wasn't the filming so much as the live streaming that was the purported problem.


----------



## wayneL (2 June 2018)

But once again it was not the actual trial that was being live-streamed, it was merey outside on public property. I believe that this will form *part of the basis of the challenge.


----------



## moXJO (2 June 2018)

*Photography in court*
Section 41 Criminal Justice Act 1925 (CJA 1925) makes it an offence to take any photograph, make or attempt to make any portrait or sketch of a justice or a witness in, or a party to, any proceedings before the court, either in the courtroom or its precincts. The penalty on summary conviction is a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale. The Attorney General's consent is not required.

The offence at s41 CJA 1925 can be charged


Ok can't even sketch. 
I don't even want to cherry pick bits out of the legal stuff there as I would probably apply it wrong.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 June 2018)

moXJO said:


> Section 41 Criminal Justice Act 1925 (CJA 1925) makes it an offence to take any photograph, make or attempt to make any portrait or sketch of a justice or a witness in, or a party to, any proceedings before the court, either in the courtroom or its precincts. The penalty on summary conviction is a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale. The Attorney General's consent is not required.




Huh ?

So all the MSM filming Pell arriving at or leaving the court are in contempt ?

Weird.


----------



## moXJO (2 June 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Huh ?
> 
> So all the MSM filming Pell arriving at or leaving the court are in contempt ?
> 
> Weird.



Thats what I thought. No idea how it applies.


----------



## moXJO (4 June 2018)

> The media reports on trials all the time, but professional outlets do so in a way that doesn’t influence public or the jury opinion of the defendants.
> 
> “There is a defence available to publishers (which includes newspapers, TV and social media users) who can show they were providing “a fair and accurate report of legal proceedings held in public, published contemporaneously and in good faith”, thus giving some latitude to the press and ensuring that the media do not shy away from accurate, factual reporting of criminal proceedings,” says the Secret Barrister.




A bit more on the media.


----------



## Tisme (4 June 2018)

moXJO said:


> A bit more on the media.




Who decides what's fair?


----------



## Tink (5 June 2018)

Freedom of speech.

Margaret Court gave her opinion and was hounded in Melbourne.


----------



## PZ99 (5 June 2018)

Freedom of speech.

Alan Joyce gave his opinion and was hounded in Perth.


----------



## Tisme (5 June 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Freedom of speech.
> 
> Alan Joyce gave his opinion and was hounded in Perth.




and China as it turns out.


----------



## PZ99 (5 June 2018)

Tisme said:


> and China as it turns out.



Yeah - bunch of commies.... I give that a big NO.


----------



## Tisme (5 June 2018)

"I hate Illinois Nazis"


----------



## dutchie (5 June 2018)

Free Speech Rallies this Weekend

MELBOURNE: Saturday 9 June, meet 10:00am at the British Consulate, 90 Collins Street, Melbourne VIC 3000 - Maplink: https://goo.gl/maps/kV6usZ8ZMQ82

SYDNEY: Saturday 9 June, meet 3:30pm at the British Consulate, 1 Macquarie Pl, Sydney NSW 2000 - Maplink: https://goo.gl/maps/Ajq3KQD8RAz

BRISBANE: Sunday 10 June, meet 9:00am at the British Consulate, 100 Eagle St, Brisbane City QLD 4000 - Maplink: https://goo.gl/maps/yRiZxBzVaao 

PERTH: Sunday 10 June, meet 4:30 pm at the British Consulate, 251 Adelaide Terrace, Perth WA 6000 - Maplink: https://goo.gl/maps/mTnAV8dHgVD2


----------



## Tink (6 June 2018)

Here is Jordan on the Canadian government trying to modify his language..
Qantas is mentioned as well..



-------------

https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson


----------



## Tisme (6 June 2018)

Tink said:


> Here is Jordan on the Canadian government trying to modify his language..
> Qantas is mentioned as well..
> 
> 
> ...





Yes 11 minutes in and he espouses what the clever people here have been saying for a few years.


----------



## Tink (8 June 2018)

Yes, the Canadian government was another one, that put Castro on a pedestal.

Just my view...


----------



## dutchie (9 June 2018)

dutchie said:


> Free Speech Rallies this Weekend
> 
> MELBOURNE: Saturday 9 June, meet 10:00am at the British Consulate, 90 Collins Street, Melbourne VIC 3000 - Maplink: https://goo.gl/maps/kV6usZ8ZMQ82
> 
> ...




Attend a rally in your hometown!


----------



## TikoMike (10 June 2018)

Tisme said:


> They are wasting their time. The lunatics are in charge of the asylum and it's going to take more than conservatives to turn it around......... it will take the marxists waking up to the vandalism they have rort on western civilisation .... China rules here we come.



Well the conservatives are trying. Mobs are getting larger and larger in London.


----------



## TikoMike (10 June 2018)




----------



## wayneL (10 June 2018)

TikoMike said:


>



Of course,  UKPravda and it's cowardly cohorts focused entirely on the 4 arrests


----------



## Macquack (10 June 2018)

moXJO said:


> I don't like what they did to Tommy. But surely someone could have told him don't film.




It is obvious to me that Robinson knew he would be arrested and probably imprisoned. This would help him make the step up from mere "poster boy" to "martyr" of the lynch mob.


----------



## wayneL (10 June 2018)

Macquack said:


> It is obvious to me that Robinson knew he would be arrested and probably imprisoned. This would help him make the step up from mere "poster boy" to "martyr" of the lynch mob.



The only lynch mob is the British establishment,  it pains me to say.

Supporters of Tommy and free speech are mostly ordinary middle and working class folk, endowed with intelligence and common sense worried about what is happening to their country


----------



## noirua (10 June 2018)

wayneL said:


> The only lynch mob is the British establishment,  it pains me to say.
> 
> Supporters of Tommy and free speech are mostly ordinary middle and working class folk, endowed with intelligence and common sense worried about what is happening to their country




Spot on. Freedom of speech is constricted in the UK and most of western Europe. Newspapers were unable to report and that includes TV due to court order restrictions. Has a bit of a Chinese flavour 'dare you not' about all this.


----------



## noirua (11 June 2018)

*Hezbollah flags fly at Al Quds Day rally and counter protest in London*
https://www.aol.co.uk/news/2018/06/...-at-al-quds-day-rally-and-counter-protest-in/


----------



## Macquack (11 June 2018)

dutchie said:


> Free Speech Rallies this Weekend
> 
> MELBOURNE: Saturday 9 June, meet 10:00am at the British Consulate, 90 Collins Street, Melbourne VIC 3000 - Maplink: https://goo.gl/maps/kV6usZ8ZMQ82
> 
> ...



It is an absolute joke that the organiser of a "free speech" rally in Melbourne is Avi Yemini, a former Israeli Defence Forces "sharp shooter" stationed on the Gaza border terrorising Palestinians. How many Palestinians has this "hero" killed?

Big turn out at that rally, there were "dozens".
https://www.news.com.au/...free-speech-rally.../c40cb9f7ed9c1ce8747189c0d535f404

I have some advice for Yemini, f*** off back to Israel and organise some "free speech" protests in Gaza.


----------



## dutchie (11 June 2018)

Macquack said:


> It is an absolute joke that the organiser of a "free speech" rally in Melbourne is Avi Yemini, a former Israeli Defence Forces "sharp shooter" stationed on the Gaza border terrorising Palestinians. How many Palestinians has this "hero" killed?
> 
> Big turn out at that rally, there were "dozens".
> https://www.news.com.au/...free-speech-rally.../c40cb9f7ed9c1ce8747189c0d535f404
> ...



Maybe your kids will wonder why you and others did not protest when you could before the state curtailed their free speech.


----------



## wayneL (11 June 2018)

Macquack said:


> It is an absolute joke that the organiser of a "free speech" rally in Melbourne is Avi Yemini, a former Israeli Defence Forces "sharp shooter" stationed on the Gaza border terrorising Palestinians. How many Palestinians has this "hero" killed?
> 
> Big turn out at that rally, there were "dozens".
> https://www.news.com.au/...free-speech-rally.../c40cb9f7ed9c1ce8747189c0d535f404
> ...



I'm guessing that you would be inviting The Radical Islamists imams who are calling for the destruction of Western civilization and all infidels to stay?


----------



## Macquack (11 June 2018)

wayneL said:


> I'm guessing that you would be inviting The Radical Islamists imams who are calling for the destruction of Western civilization and all infidels to stay?



One hypocrite group at a time please.

I am happy to have anyone threatening to kill people to be jailed. How does that fit with your "free speech" position.

Was it just you Wayne and Dutchie at the Brisbane "Free Speech" rally? They got "dozens" of people in Melbourne but Brisbane did not even rate a mention.


----------



## dutchie (11 June 2018)

Macquack said:


> Was it just you Wayne and Dutchie at the Brisbane "Free Speech" rally? They got "dozens" of people in Melbourne but Brisbane did not even rate a mention.



Yeah, but we really needed a third to help hold up the banner.


----------



## wayneL (11 June 2018)

Macquack said:


> One hypocrite group at a time please.
> 
> I am happy to have anyone threatening to kill people to be jailed. How does that fit with your "free speech" position.
> 
> Was it just you Wayne and Dutchie at the Brisbane "Free Speech" rally? They got "dozens" of people in Melbourne but Brisbane did not even rate a mention.



1/ Cool,  so the coppers should arrest all those threatening Avi Yemeni's life,  in your opinion? 

2/ The rally is only moral support from here,  the real action is behind the scenes, like Brexit, Ontario,   Austria,  Italy,  Sweden and elsewhere soon. 

Would have loved to have been one of the in excess of 20000 in London though


----------



## Tisme (11 June 2018)

Conditioning 101


----------



## TikoMike (11 June 2018)

Macquack said:


> One hypocrite group at a time please.
> 
> I am happy to have anyone threatening to kill people to be jailed. How does that fit with your "free speech" position.
> 
> Was it just you Wayne and Dutchie at the Brisbane "Free Speech" rally? They got "dozens" of people in Melbourne but Brisbane did not even rate a mention.



Honestly, seems like fake news. The live streams I saw in Melbourne chanting the Tommy chant looked like hundreds not dozens. Street looked a mile long of people.


----------



## TikoMike (11 June 2018)

wayneL said:


> The only lynch mob is the British establishment,  it pains me to say.
> 
> Supporters of Tommy and free speech are mostly ordinary middle and working class folk, endowed with intelligence and common sense worried about what is happening to their country



It's a pity they had to abandon their free time looking after family and the time spent working. Something ANTIFA doesn't do with either, giving them free reign to throw bins around at property, attack "normies" or whatever else they do.


----------



## moXJO (11 June 2018)

Macquack said:


> One hypocrite group at a time please.
> 
> I am happy to have anyone threatening to kill people to be jailed. How does that fit with your "free speech" position.
> 
> Was it just you Wayne and Dutchie at the Brisbane "Free Speech" rally? They got "dozens" of people in Melbourne but Brisbane did not even rate a mention.



You don't want the right gathering numbers.  There was about 120-170 at each rally. Thats up from previous attempts. Avi is sht awful at organizing groups and leadership as well. But eventually someone will come with enough charisma.

I agree that Tommy may have martyred himself to engage the right and cause push back. 

 I'd rather a lazy drift back to center, as opposed to idiots rioting on the streets.


----------



## wayneL (14 June 2018)

British Government just upped the stakes.


----------



## cynic (15 June 2018)

Apparently there are conflicting accounts on Tommy's current accommodations.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/247445

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/no-tommy-robinson-hasnt-been-12706229

In light of observed behaviours of the media spectrum (main stream through to radical fringes) throughout recent decades, I  am personally undecided about which is the more dependable news source, and therefore welcome input from others, in the hope of becoming better equipped for arbitration of the reported "facts".


----------



## wayneL (15 June 2018)

Cynic
This fellow is Tommy's manager,  if you have twitter

Take a look at Caolan Robertson (@CaolanRob): https://twitter.com/CaolanRob?s=09


----------



## wayneL (15 June 2018)

I wouldn't believe any uk mainstream press without independent verification fwiw


----------



## cynic (4 July 2018)

Apparently Tommy's scheduled appeal date has been postponed:


I haven't, as yet, been able to locate any corroboration via MSM (Given their track record to date, I won't be holding my breath).


----------



## wayneL (4 July 2018)

Definitely been suspended cynic.  Also,  the judge has been publicly commenting on the case, raising a few eyebrows.


----------



## Tisme (9 July 2018)

Visa for Lauren Southern declined:







https://www.news.com.au/national/po...a/news-story/1855175cc3ecc4a102fab257abf3bc7d

"
LAUREN Southern knows her upcoming tour of Australia will be massively popular.

She’s a lightning rod for Australians fed up with political correctness who are nudging further and further to the right.

The controversial Canadian will sell out shows in Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane, Perth and Adelaide before jumping on a plane to New Zealand for one show in Auckland.

A look at her ticket prices reveals she can charge whatever she likes, too.

Southern, who was banned from entering the UK earlier this year after previously distributing “racist material”, will be touring in July with fellow countryman Stefan Molyneux.

General admission tickets to the pair’s talks, starting on July 20, cost $79 per person. Those who want to get in early for “first choice of seats” can pay an extra $20. From there, it gets steep.

A meet-and-greet with the pair for 30 minutes will cost $199. If you want to spend 45 minutes and get some signed merchandise, it’s $499.

An “intimate dinner” with the pair will set you back $749.





Lauren Southern. Picture: Instagram @laurencheriieSource:Instagram

In a video posted to YouTube promoting her visit, Southern said Australians are “at a crossroads”.


“Do you want to retain your culture, do you want to retain your borders, family, identity,” she said.

“Or will the boats keep coming, will the no-go zones keep growing and will you become another victim of multiculturalism.”

Southern was banned from entering the UK in March after antagonising Muslims by displaying flyers reading “Allah is a Gay God” and “Allah is trans”. She claimed the stunt was part of a social experiment to prove Islam is a homophobic religion.

Molyneux also doesn’t shy away from weighing in on controversial subjects. The self-published author has around 780,000 subscribers on his YouTube account where he publishes videos on subjects including Western civilisation, Islam, feminism and political correctness.

Titles of his videos include “The Rise and Fall of Western Culture” and “The State of Masculinity”.





Southern plans to ‘shock people’ when she visits Australia next month. Picture: Instagram @laurencheriieSource:Instagram

He has also uploaded feature-length videos voicing his opinions on the fall of the Roman Empire, immigration, Karl Marx and Bill Cosby.

Southern told Sky News on Monday night that she plans to “shock people” during her speaking tour but that she does not agree with comparisons to Milo Yiannopoulos.

Yiannopoulos’ tour of Australia last year led to violent demonstrations where hundreds of police were forced to intervene in clashes between left-wing protesters and supporters of the far-right figure.

“They make it appear like we’re going to bring all this mayhem,” Southern said, referring to a news.com.au article.

“I’m certain our ideas will shock people and our arguments will bring a lot of excitement to Australia, but I don’t remember discussing throwing bottles or rioting or setting anything on fire.

“In fact, they mention in the article, ‘Will they bring as much chaos as Milo Yiannopoulos?’ We’re not going to be the ones bringing the mayhem, the left-wing rioters who are going to be there — they’ll be the ones doing that.”
"


----------



## wayneL (9 July 2018)

She should just preach jihad,  they'd have waved her on through.


----------



## dutchie (12 July 2018)

Well done England in getting to W C semifinals. Fans show their support of team before and after match.

Hope they are as supportive of the protest for free speech on the 14th July, after all their right to free speech is being slowly but surely attacked. 

Losing freedom of speech is much more important than winning World Cup.


----------



## basilio (13 July 2018)

I know that many posters on  ASF are quick to use a range of alternative websites to back up their views.
So here is one I came across that seems to tick all the boxes.  

Appears to be run by a pretty smart dude as well. Phd no less...










*WELCOME TO THE TRUTHBRARY.ORG*
*REJECT THE MAINSTREME MEDIA + THE LIEbrary OF FALSE INFOMATION THEY TRY TO PUSH INTO THE PUBLICS MIND'S. THE TRUTHBRARY WILL SET YOU FREE. THIS IS A LIBERTY WEBSITE FOR TRUE AMERICA AND TRUTH LOVING AMERICANS.*

https://www.truthbrary.org/


----------



## luutzu (14 July 2018)

basilio said:


> I know that many posters on  ASF are quick to use a range of alternative websites to back up their views.
> So here is one I came across that seems to tick all the boxes.
> 
> Appears to be run by a pretty smart dude as well. Phd no less...
> ...




PhD? Trump "University"?

I never thought you could make fun of a library, maybe except for its lack of funding, but wrong again.


----------



## moXJO (14 July 2018)

basilio said:


> I know that many posters on  ASF are quick to use a range of alternative websites to back up their views.
> So here is one I came across that seems to tick all the boxes.
> 
> Appears to be run by a pretty smart dude as well. Phd no less...
> ...



Pffffttt.... no lizard people. Obviously low quality.


----------



## Tisme (14 July 2018)

basilio said:


> I know that many posters on  ASF are quick to use a range of alternative websites to back up their views.
> So here is one I came across that seems to tick all the boxes.
> 
> Appears to be run by a pretty smart dude as well. Phd no less...
> ...





Not sure what you mean by alternative websites, but that's a good tongue in cheek one, built for sh1t5 & giggles I would suspect.


----------



## basilio (14 July 2018)

Tisme said:


> Not sure what you mean by alternative websites, but that's a good tongue in cheek one, built for sh1t5 & giggles I would suspect.




Such a nimble little thinker...

You clearly have no problems swallowing and regurgitating many of the more outrageous stories from a myriad of maddies and their poisonous offerings.

*BUT* when your astute little antenna thinks someone is just having a go at the rubbish you otherwise swallow you can spot it a mile off.

Makes total sense. Wait for the fallout.


----------



## basilio (14 July 2018)

From Dr Billy Wayne Ruddick Founder/ CEO of Truthbrary


----------



## moXJO (14 July 2018)

You know thats Sacha baron cohen right?


----------



## basilio (14 July 2018)

moXJO said:


> You know thats Sacha baron cohen right?



Of Course...

It will be fascinating to see the true and unvarnished thoughts from Americas finest and maddest when his next series of interviews are screened. In theory they might well be embarassed by some of the things they say.

But.......  No way ! In the  Trumpian year of 2018  it seems anyone from the Prez down can say whatever they want regardless of logic, fact, or sensibility as long as they have absolutely no sense of shame or  any concern about their truth not according with reality.

* Will Sacha Baron Cohen's undercover series be the TV event of the year? *
Shot in secrecy, the satirist’s new show Who Is America? sees him take aim at Trump and the US political elite. It looks set to be something truly special

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2018/jul/10/sacha-baron-cohen-who-is-america-trump-tv-event


----------



## Tisme (14 July 2018)

basilio said:


> Of Course...




No you didn't .. you made a goose of yourself


----------



## basilio (14 July 2018)

Tisme said:


> No you didn't .. you made a goose of yourself




Really Tisme ???   You believe  I go looking for Alex Jones look alike websites with just a few extra twists to look really mad and then post them here for your edification?

You know my major (but not only) source of information is The Guardian. I picked up on the Sarah Palin story a couple of days again and then it turned into Sacha responding *as the character he created to interview her.
*
Just brilliant.  

And "thanks" for the tick Tisme.  You clearly saw the satire way before everyone else --- didn't you. 

* Sacha Baron Cohen hits back at Sarah Palin as Roy Moore admits being duped *
The former Alaska governor had called the comedian ‘evil, exploitative and sick’ after unwittingly featuring in Cohen’s new show – along with the disgraced Alabama Senate candidate

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-...palin-who-is-america-tv-show-veteran-response


----------



## Tisme (15 July 2018)

basilio said:


> Really Tisme ???   You believe  I go looking for Alex Jones look alike websites with just a few extra twists to look really mad and then post them here for your edification?
> 
> You know my major (but not only) source of information is The Guardian. I picked up on the Sarah Palin story a couple of days again and then it turned into Sacha responding *as the character he created to interview her.
> *
> ...




Then why have a crack at me when I already gave you the clue it was a windup site?


----------



## wayneL (20 July 2018)

A discussion of liberty and free speech

https://libertyworks.org.au/freedom-of-speech-and-consequences/



> ANDREW RUSSELL 16/07/2018
> 
> The recent uproar over allegedly “misogynist” comments made by Senator Leyonhjelm in response to Senator Hanson-Young’s implications that men are collectively responsible for the rape-murder of Eurydice Dixon (and all violence perpetrated by any man against any woman) has brought out a familiar slogan: “freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences.”
> 
> ...


----------



## PZ99 (29 July 2018)




----------



## Tisme (29 July 2018)

PZ99 said:


>





She could have just asked Pauline Hanson.


----------



## TikoMike (29 July 2018)

PZ99 said:


>


----------



## dutchie (30 July 2018)

Lakemba, Sydney, Australia - a no go zone.


----------



## Tisme (30 July 2018)

dutchie said:


> Lakemba, Sydney, Australia - a no go zone.




Should complete the project and put a fence around it to prevent breakouts.


----------



## basilio (30 July 2018)

Tisme said:


> Should complete the project and put a fence around it to prevent breakouts.




For their own "protection" of course. 
Perhaps their own personal stars, tattooed,  ID number and  inserted microchips to finish off the job.


----------



## Tisme (30 July 2018)

basilio said:


> For their own "protection" of course.
> Perhaps their own personal stars, tattooed,  ID number and  inserted microchips to finish off the job.




That's the spirit !


----------



## basilio (30 July 2018)

Tisme said:


> That's the spirit !



I thought you would appreciate such sentiments Tisme.  
By the way I think you would look just beautiful in black. Perhaps with a cute skull motiff?


----------



## wayneL (30 July 2018)

I've followed the Southern/Molyneaux tour of Oz as closely as I could, but didn't actually attend an event,for my own reasons. 

Apart from some disingenuous reporting in MSM and ludicrous screeching "antidem", I haven't heard a single reasonable debating point made in response to them. 

I may have missed them due to work commitments... anyone got anything apart from the usual name calling?


----------



## Darc Knight (30 July 2018)

basilio said:


> I thought you would appreciate such sentiments Tisme.
> By the way I think you would look just beautiful in black. Perhaps with a cute skull motiff?




I thought you were going to say the Jolly Roger 
You two are so cute!


----------



## basilio (30 July 2018)

Darc Knight said:


> I thought you were going to say the Jolly Roger
> You two are so cute!




Aren't we just a pair !! It's so much fun making spectacturley obnoxious "jokes" about setting up proper  facilities for our Muslim neighbours.  But really, you should see Tisme in a tight black suit with a whip.

Very fetching indeed.






http://caraycaray.blogspot.com/2011/02/llena-thursday-21011-hisses-and-kisses.html


----------



## Tisme (30 July 2018)

basilio said:


> I thought you would appreciate such sentiments Tisme.
> By the way I think you would look just beautiful in black. Perhaps with a cute skull motiff?




Ghost Who Walks?

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0892/0186/products/Art_of_the_Phantom_cover_sm.jpg?v=1473180987


----------



## PZ99 (30 July 2018)




----------



## dutchie (1 August 2018)

A major UN pact on migration commits governments to introduce programs aimed at “sensitising and educating” the media and withholding public funding from publications that “promote intolerance” of migrants.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/na...s/news-story/0531c1b9264a3bc8a395e5f81dd99a0b

The ABC will love this.

Little by little they chip away at your freedom! (the old frog in boiling water trick)


----------



## dutchie (2 August 2018)

*Tommy Robinson released.*

 Thanks his supporters as he leaves jail after winning appeal over 13-month contempt sentence for Facebook Live video at Asian sex gang trial

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6013407/Tommy-Robinson-learn-appeal-outcome.html


----------



## Tisme (3 August 2018)




----------



## wayneL (3 August 2018)

Tisme said:


> View attachment 88714



Brilliant,  Im getting me one of those!!!


----------



## luutzu (3 August 2018)

PZ99 said:


>





Wot. The. Fork. 

I knew we're being watched, but being studied like an Attenborough doco? Jesus man. 

There's a pub, a bottle shop, an RSL club. Though I don't think they're doing very well seeing how the Muslims don't drink or gamble, nasty people... who doesn't gamble and get drunk.

Lakemba doesn't have that many Leb/Muslims nowadays though. There're more South Asian/Pakistani variety. Probably more Lebs in the surrounding suburbs like Punchbowl, Wiley Park. 

I guess that's them spreading out ey 

So whenever that fence comes up, safest to cover the entire Bankstown-Canterbury council.


----------



## luutzu (3 August 2018)

wayneL said:


> I've followed the Southern/Molyneaux tour of Oz as closely as I could, but didn't actually attend an event,for my own reasons.
> 
> Apart from some disingenuous reporting in MSM and ludicrous screeching "antidem", I haven't heard a single reasonable debating point made in response to them.
> 
> I may have missed them due to work commitments... anyone got anything apart from the usual name calling?




Just saw her video in Lakemba. Stupid google, stop following me!

Anyway, the officer was right to stop her from going to the Mosque. She spun it into some sort of "no go zone" and not being permitted to go to Muslim blah blah... but think about it. 

First, there's a Church standing where they were filming. There's catholic school opposite that. There's another Christian Church near that school. There's also another Catholic High School behind Haldon St. There's also another Church on Haldon. 

Multiculturalism seems to be alive and well in Lakemba. 

But of course it's not because the officer can imagine possible scenarios where it might not end well.

Would, say, any White old guy be fine with Elon Musk calling him a Pedo because... wel, because he's White and old and all the pedo we know fit that description? 

So you don't go to a place of worship, wearing tank tops like it's a bar, then (very possibly because you're a racist) ask Muslims how bad are they: always terrorist bad, or only sometime.

Do stupid things like that and one or two of their young Turks might very well punch you. 

"Are you a terrorist. How often do you beat your wife. What do you have against pork? Why do you hate the Jews and good Christians? When do you plan to take over Australia and turn it into Sharia?

And I love the slow-mo of Muslims walking normally.


----------



## Logique (10 August 2018)

In the '_Peoples Republic of Victoria_', commuters may only see state approved news at the railway station: 
https://www.news.com.au/national/vi...s/news-story/c6c7361d8ae07ce9757372a6e58846b5


----------



## wayneL (11 August 2018)

Even Mr Bean is smarter than the regressives.


----------



## lindsayf (11 August 2018)

PZ99 said:


>




That is pretty disturbing isn’t it?
If not, why isn’t it?


----------



## SirRumpole (11 August 2018)

lindsayf said:


> That is pretty disturbing isn’t it?
> If not, why isn’t it?




Walking down the street is a breach of the peace ?

The cops should have protected her rights to go where she wanted and given her a police escort if necessary instead of telling her to push off.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> Just saw her video in Lakemba. Stupid google, stop following me!
> 
> Anyway, the officer was right to stop her from going to the Mosque. She spun it into some sort of "no go zone" and not being permitted to go to Muslim blah blah... but think about it.
> 
> ...




That's a lot of cr@p I'd have to say. What has Elon Musk got to do with Muslims creating a zone in a public area that other people can't walk into ?

She was on a public street in a free country and the police tell her to pi$$ off. This is Australia now folks.


----------



## luutzu (11 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> That's a lot of cr@p I'd have to say. What has Elon Musk got to do with Muslims creating a zone in a public area that other people can't walk into ?
> 
> She was on a public street in a free country and the police tell her to pi$$ off. This is Australia now folks.




Who can't walk into the Mosque?

She can if she wants to. Just don't dress like that. It's what you do when you walk into someone else's place of worship. 

Would a priest or a rabbi or a monk mind if we walk bare foot and shirtless into their place of worship? 

Maybe the cop didn't handle it well, maybe he ought to give her a police escort. But then if he were to escort her, her headline might be: need police escort in a Muslim city. 

That or he just can't be asked. I know I wouldn't be bothered spending taxpayer's resources to escort a racist moron doing hate speech if I could just tell her to go away. 

And she's not some sort of indepedent, in-depth, investigative journalist whose rights are being denied by the big bad police state because she dare to seek the truth. Jesus, she's not a Julian Assange. 

Anyway, the facts speak for itself. There a few Christian/Catholic places of worship, schools just around where she was standing. 

There are literally 4 Churches, 2 Catholic school, 1 RSL, 1 bottle shop within 500m of where she was "barred" from entering because of the Muslims.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> Who can't walk into the Mosque?




She didn't want to go into the Mosque, just walk past it on a public street.

She wasn't even allowed to do that.


----------



## luutzu (11 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> She didn't want to go into the Mosque, just walk past it on a public street.
> 
> She wasn't even allowed to do that.




She planned to go to it. The officer says no.

She was at a corner of the Mosque's street. Would have to walk a block and a half to get to the Mosque. 

I think the officer worked out in his head the possible consequences if she start ranting and asking inflammatory questions once she gets there. She can't ask it without entering the Mosque 'cause the Muslims don't turn up and hang around it all day, everyday. 

She walked along Haldon St though. That's where the shops and Muslims are. She filmed them in slow motion where they look really, really shifty. But she survived the war zone so what's with walking down a quiet street towards the Mosque?


----------



## SirRumpole (11 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> She walked along Haldon St though. That's where the shops and Muslims are. She filmed them in slow motion where they look really, really shifty. But she survived the war zone so what's with walking down a quiet street towards the Mosque?




If she tried the same thing with a Christian church, no one would bat an eyelid, and she would probably get invited in.

The Muslims think that they have their own little enclave where no one else can go without their say so.

That's not appropriate in a democratic country. She wasn't carrying a gun, only a microphone.

Decent people would just not talk to her if they didn't want to, not have her thrown out.


----------



## luutzu (11 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> If she tried the same thing with a Christian church, no one would bat an eyelid, and she would probably get invited in.
> 
> The Muslims think that they have their own little enclave where no one else can go without their say so.
> 
> ...




It wasn't the Muslim that thrown her out or banned her or gave her a hard time.

It was the police officer. And he didn't do it because he want to ban her from her free speech. He did say that he know her opinions and she's free to hold her views.

Like I said, she survived Haldon St, the retail/main street where Muslims roam. 

The officer confronted her on a quiet, residential street. She walks down that street and half of it is a public school, the rest are a few flats and some houses before she reaches the Mosque.

If she's to be stopped or beaten up or driven out, it'd be on Haldon. Not on that street. I know the place alright. Trust me.

Different religion have different dress code. No Muslim gave her a hard time dressing like she did on Haldon. Just to go into a Mosque you got to be more modest.

But that's just my opinion. Who knows, maybe the Muslim inside the Mosque wouldn't have a problem with her dress code either. Just saying that the police officer, given his experience and forethought, could see possible stirring the shiet if she goes.

He might be right, might not be. But he made the call on the spot. And if you ask me, it's the right call.

If she's really serious about doing investigation; or want to interview Muslims and their religious leaders. Or even protest in front of the Mosque. All she need to do is follow the law, ask for permission to organise a protest etc. 

Anyway, too many people think that hate speech is the same as free speech. They're not. It's like thinking that freedom mean you can drive recklessly or beat anyone up.


----------



## Wysiwyg (12 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> Different religion have different dress code. No Muslim gave her a hard time dressing like she did on Haldon. Just to go into a Mosque you got to be more modest.



This is Australia not the Middle East. It is a free country to go to any place one wants. You go to Chinatowns and no one is hiding from cameras and giving you nasty looks or police warning not to venture near the religious places.  That woman exposed the true nature of extreme Islam. The presence of a critique creates automatic wrath. Get rid of that ideology from Australia.


----------



## Wysiwyg (12 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The Muslims think that they have their own little enclave where no one else can go without their say so.



The mere presence of that woman created such turmoil and hard to believe it happens in Australia. Evidence of what large numbers of them are capable of. Safe haven status and the numbers swell both externally and internally.


----------



## luutzu (12 August 2018)

Wysiwyg said:


> This is Australia not the Middle East. It is a free country to go to any place one wants. You go to Chinatowns and no one is hiding from cameras and giving you nasty looks or police warning not to venture near the religious places.  That woman exposed the true nature of extreme Islam. The presence of a critique creates automatic wrath. Get rid of that ideology from Australia.




If you go to Chinatown and randomly shirtfront a Chinese as to why s/he is taking over the entire South China Sea; why s/he is alright with beating up the Uighur; or why does the Chinese culture condone human rights abuse, food contamination and generally making Donald Trump unhappy with unfair  trades... I'd imagine you're going to have a very different experience than the usual Yum Cha experience where you'd only be outraged at the bill.


----------



## luutzu (12 August 2018)

Wysiwyg said:


> The mere presence of that woman created such turmoil and hard to believe it happens in Australia. Evidence of what large numbers of them are capable of. Safe haven status and the numbers swell both externally and internally.




No it didn't. I saw the video. The only thing the Muslims did to her was walking in slow motion as she bravely walk down the main street.


----------



## Wysiwyg (13 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> No it didn't. I saw the video. The only thing the Muslims did to her was walking in slow motion as she bravely walk down the main street.



Yeah they're nut jobs as a collective. Their sympathisers are another breed altogether.


----------



## Wysiwyg (13 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> If you go to Chinatown and randomly shirtfront a Chinese as to why s/he is taking over the entire South China Sea; why s/he is alright with beating up the Uighur; or why does the Chinese culture condone human rights abuse, food contamination and generally making Donald Trump unhappy with unfair  trades... I'd imagine you're going to have a very different experience than the usual Yum Cha experience where you'd only be outraged at the bill.



Comparison crap. Justification garbage.


----------



## Tisme (13 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> No it didn't. I saw the video. The only thing the Muslims did to her was walking in slow motion as she bravely walk down the main street.


----------



## Tisme (13 August 2018)




----------



## Tisme (13 August 2018)

My long term held belief and probably an archaic Australian tradition that has been thrown under a bus.

Resiliance is the key.


----------



## luutzu (13 August 2018)

Wysiwyg said:


> Yeah they're nut jobs as a collective. Their sympathisers are another breed altogether.




Why are they a nutjob as a collective? 

No other country or culture have terrorists? Warriors? War criminals? Only Islam breeds them?

Other culture have a superior religion that doesn't preach hate and discrimination? Other religion believe in real and good things while all Islam is is about hate?

If you want to believe such things, you should switch off the mainstream news and get your information from history books.


----------



## luutzu (13 August 2018)

Tisme said:


>





That guy should be careful bashing Muslims. He could easily be mistaken for one. So when the fence comes up they might not believe he's a more superior Jew and lock him up anyway. 

So there's a White girl walking around, and surviving, a "no go zone" full of Muslim. There's an Israeli guy working in Lakemba for a few years, knocking on doors and everyone knowing he's a Jew. 

They both survived to tell the tale... but Lakemba is still no-go and implementing Sharia. 

Something doesn't make sense there.


----------



## Wysiwyg (13 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> Why are they a nutjob as a collective?
> 
> No other country or culture have terrorists? Warriors? War criminals? Only Islam breeds them?
> 
> ...



Other countries deal with their issues. My defence is of the freer society that Australia is which is being undermined by adherents to a religion of garbage. This is Australia and those other countries will surely welcome the same types. QF634 is leaving soon.


----------



## luutzu (13 August 2018)

Wysiwyg said:


> Other countries deal with their issues. My defence is of the freer society that Australia is which is being undermined by adherents to a religion of garbage. This is Australia and those other countries will surely welcome the same types. QF634 is leaving soon.




A free and open society mean one where its citizens and visitors are free and open to practise their beliefs and interests - as long as such beliefs do not infringe on the rights, safety etc. of others.

It shouldn't mean practise and do what you want as long as it's the main one.


----------



## Wysiwyg (13 August 2018)

Tisme said:


> My long term held belief and probably an archaic Australian tradition that has been thrown under a bus.
> 
> Resiliance is the key.



Insults that attract hate and wrath are not the smartest thing to do. Sure it does exposes the true nature of the underlying but not helpful. True blues love receiving a well intentioned insult. They would laugh the insulter under the table.


----------



## Wysiwyg (13 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> A free and open society mean one where its citizens and visitors are free and open to practise their beliefs and interests - as long as such beliefs do not infringe on the rights, safety etc. of others.
> 
> It shouldn't mean practise and do what you want as long as it's the main one.



So integration with the "Australian" way of life is happening at La Kemba? Their religion is all consuming and taken to the literal Nth. That area is no longer Australian turf it is Muslim turf.


----------



## Wysiwyg (13 August 2018)

When will it be admitted that some cultures are too different to ever be able to integrate.


----------



## luutzu (13 August 2018)

Wysiwyg said:


> So integration with the "Australian" way of life is happening at La Kemba? Their religion is all consuming and taken to the literal Nth. That area is no longer Australian turf it is Muslim turf.




I'm not a Muslim and I live in La K'Akba quite normally. No need to convert or anything.


----------



## wayneL (13 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> I'm not a Muslim and I live in La K'Akba quite normally. No need to convert or anything.



Not yet....


----------



## Tisme (14 August 2018)




----------



## Tisme (14 August 2018)




----------



## Wysiwyg (14 August 2018)

Are they punishing him for speaking out publicly against Islam? In my opinion he need not flame the situation as that could lead to retaliatory attacks on innocent people.


----------



## luutzu (14 August 2018)

Wysiwyg said:


> Are they punishing him for speaking out publicly against Islam? In my opinion he need not flame the situation as that could lead to retaliatory attacks on innocent people.




Weren't he he trouble with the court because he live-stream a court hearing after a second warning from the judge?

Aren't there laws against anyone filming or publishing details of certain court cases if it's a closed court, the parties are minors, the judge says no etc.?


----------



## Wysiwyg (14 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> Weren't he he trouble with the court because he live-stream a court hearing after a second warning from the judge?
> 
> Aren't there laws against anyone filming or publishing details of certain court cases if it's a closed court, the parties are minors, the judge says no etc.?



Don't know the exact charge but whatever it was a higher office overruled. He should sit down and let the politicians and police handle the criminals. LOL. It is too late once the Islamic State are established and ruling over a borough.


----------



## sptrawler (15 August 2018)

It looks like another victim, of the PC agenda.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-15/live-parliament-condemns-fraser-anning-speech/10122236

The media will have a field day, with this guy.


----------



## Tisme (15 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> It looks like another victim, of the PC agenda.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-15/live-parliament-condemns-fraser-anning-speech/10122236
> 
> The media will have a field day, with this guy.




Yeah they all jumped on the holier than though bandwagon after his speech. 

Duncan Campbell Scott must feel miffed he didn't get a mention.


----------



## SirRumpole (15 August 2018)

The SJW on ABC The Drum were denouncing white nationalist extremism, but there was no mention of Muslim extremism that has provoked the backlash by people like Anning and Katter.

I don't hear people calling for an end to Greek, French or Italian immigration because such people cause little trouble here, but there are Muslims out on the streets killing innocent people in the name of their religion and being surprised that people are pushing back against that.

Annings speech seems to have divided the anti Muslim forces.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-...ttleground-between-katter-and-hanson/10123208


----------



## sptrawler (15 August 2018)

I think Pauline learnt her lesson last time around, you have to be careful what you say, lest you get the left wing press baying for your blood.


----------



## SirRumpole (15 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> I think Pauline learnt her lesson last time around, you have to be careful what you say, lest you get the left wing press baying for your blood.




Fraser Anning built his own aircraft apparently, I hope he hasn't been misusing it for political purposes or the ABC may investigate him.


----------



## Tisme (15 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The SJW on ABC The Drum were denouncing white nationalist extremism, but there was no mention of Muslim extremism that has provoked the backlash by people like Anning and Katter.
> 
> I don't hear people calling for an end to Greek, French or Italian immigration because such people cause little trouble here, but there are Muslims out on the streets killing innocent people in the name of their religion and being surprised that people are pushing back against that.
> 
> ...




There's muslims and then there's muslims. The old skool muslims that have been in Oz for many generations have my prima facie vote based on personal friendships.


----------



## SirRumpole (15 August 2018)

Tisme said:


> There's muslims and then there's muslims. The old skool muslims that have been in Oz for many generations have my prima facie vote based on personal friendships.




Ah yes, but we don't know which Muslims take the Koran seriously enough to be radicalised.


----------



## luutzu (15 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Ah yes, but we don't know which Muslims take the Koran seriously enough to be radicalised.




What else would radicalised a person Rumpole? Just Islam is it?


----------



## SirRumpole (15 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> What else would radicalised a person Rumpole? Just Islam is it?




You tell me, and then tell me if they are going around killing innocent people on the streets or planning terrorist attacks.


----------



## wayneL (15 August 2018)

Predictable response from the virtue signallers and panderers. Its a conversation that needs to be had before we get caught up in the impending Civil World War I. 

You wouldn't call him an orator by any means,  but kudos for having the cajones


----------



## luutzu (15 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> You tell me, and then tell me if they are going around killing innocent people on the streets or planning terrorist attacks.




Some White Supremacist in the US didn't slammed his car into the crowd just last year? Killing an innocent victim? 

Was that just one crazy guy who happen to also be White and Christian, or should we start calling White/Christian names now?

How about rich, economically powerful rapist and sexual predators? They're just rapists or it's a White thing?

How about the warmongers in high places authorising hundreds of billions of dollars a year towards the war machine? Then put those to good use flattening cities, blowing up people with perfect precision?

Did we the people authorise and approve of those because they claim to be our leaders doing god's work to protect us?

Try applying the same set of rules and generalisation we're applying to the Muslims. We're not going to like what we see in "ourselves".

So by all mean call out the terrorists, just don't think that they're terrorist because a religion or a culture tells them so.


----------



## SirRumpole (15 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> So by all mean call out the terrorists, just don't think that they're terrorist because a religion or a culture tells them so.




Muslim terrorists do what they do in the name of their religion, which sort of negates your statement above.


----------



## luutzu (15 August 2018)

wayneL said:


> Predictable response from the virtue signallers and panderers. Its a conversation that needs to be had before we get caught up in the impending Civil World War I.
> 
> You wouldn't call him an orator by any means,  but kudos for having the cajones




Any weak idiot can trample on the weak and the despised. What takes cajones is standing up for them because it is the right thing to do.


----------



## Tisme (15 August 2018)

I bet this woman can get off traffic tickets:


----------



## SirRumpole (15 August 2018)

Tisme said:


> I bet this woman can get off traffic tickets:





Emotion and hysteria seemed to be running rampant today. 

If people think that Anning is a political troll, it's best to just not feed him.


----------



## luutzu (15 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Muslim terrorists do what they do in the name of their religion, which sort of negates your statement above.




Yea, and Trump, Bush Jr., Obama, every other warmongers also bomb and destroy cities in the name of their religion and their people too. 

Should the American people be blamed for those war crimes?

How about all the Jewish people of the world? Should they also be blamed for the genocidal, racist bs Israel and its King Yahoo claims to be doing in the name of the Jewish faith?

There's an American of Jewish descent who recently condemn his idiot nephew for his full-throated support for Trump and this Muslim ban, the "war" on "immigrants", excusing the separation of children from their parents.

The man said that if the US were to do the same thing his screwed up nephew is proposing and supporting to brown nose his way to power, his entire family would have been wiped out by the Nazi 100 years ago. 

Aren't one of the Western value that thing about individualism?


----------



## cynic (15 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> ....
> 
> Try applying the same set of rules and generalisation we're applying to the Muslims. We're not going to like what we see in "ourselves".
> 
> So by all mean call out the terrorists, just don't think that they're terrorist because a religion or a culture tells them so.



On those last two paragraphs, I am in partial agreement.

However, I do believe that the unabated practice of that most popular of all religions, namely HolierThanThouism, to be the more likely precursor to the emergence of zealous extremism.


----------



## Tisme (15 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> You tell me, and then tell me if they are going around killing innocent people on the streets or planning terrorist attacks.




Or just plain vandalism:

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018...coordinated-fire-bomb-rampage-across-multiple


----------



## wayneL (15 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> Any weak idiot can trample on the weak and the despised. What takes cajones is standing up for them because it is the right thing to do.



Emotive and not what was mooted Grasshopper. Additionally "the right thing to do" has hierarchial imperitives, sans hyterical appeals to emotion, in a msturely conducted debate. 

What is right for Yusaf the beheader from Syria,  might not be the right thing for Janey the 16yo white girl from Balmain. 

Let's have a *sober discussion my orthoptarian friend.


----------



## luutzu (15 August 2018)

cynic said:


> On those last two paragraphs, I am in partial agreement.
> 
> However, I do believe that the unabated practice of that most popular of all religions, namely HolierThanThouism, to be the more likely precursor to the emergence of zealous extremism.




I don't think I'm better than anybody else. Though I probably am better than a lot of people. See, not very extreme at all. Very middle of the road awesomeness.


----------



## luutzu (15 August 2018)

wayneL said:


> Emotive and not what was mooted Grasshopper. Additionally "the right thing to do" has hierarchial imperitives, sans hyterical appeals to emotion, in a msturely conducted debate.
> 
> What is right for Yusaf the beheader from Syria,  might not be the right thing for Janey the 16yo white girl from Balmain.
> 
> Let's have a *sober discussion my orthoptarian friend.




Judge, or not judge, people for their crimes and not the crimes of others. How's that for doing the right thing?


----------



## SirRumpole (15 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> Judge, or not judge, people for their crimes and not the crimes of others. How's that for doing the right thing?




It's the ideology that is the problem, not the people themselves, but unfortunately they are bound to that ideology by intimidation and threats of reprisal from unknown lunatics, and that makes their ideology incompatible with a democracy where people have the right to leave a religion if they believe that it's not for them.


----------



## wayneL (15 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> Judge, or not judge, people for their crimes and not the crimes of others. How's that for doing the right thing?



Pretty much what Ive been advocating all along. So let's investigate those who wish to enter,  for both criminal history and cultural congruency.


----------



## luutzu (15 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> It's the ideology that is the problem, not the people themselves, but unfortunately they are bound to that ideology by intimidation and threats of reprisal from unknown lunatics, and that makes their ideology incompatible with a democracy where people have the right to leave a religion if they believe that it's not for them.




A person close to me know of a friend who was very happy when she finally rediscovered her Jewish roots. Married a very religious guy... then soon enough regretted it. Her life was threatened when she wanted a divorce from both himself and his faith. 

So there's a few nutjob in every religion. Sometime there are just nutjob without any religion attached too. 

Anyway, we've been through this. There's just too much misinformation out there. Some of them by former "victims" of the faith too. Like what's her name?


----------



## luutzu (15 August 2018)

wayneL said:


> Pretty much what Ive been advocating all along. So let's investigate those who wish to enter,  for both criminal history and cultural congruency.




Maybe because you've never tried to enter Australia from a poor country, but trust me, even a tourist or a foreign student wanting to come over to a country like Australia have to go through a bunch of health, security, financial checks.

So forget about being a refugee or permanent resident. "Extreme vetting" is just some bs Trump made up to sound like he's "strong" and "tough".

Btw, he just got his third wife's parents over under the family-reunion rule he so hated because it allow "those people" to bring their entire family over and drain the money and out of the country. 

Back to topic... cultural congruence would be passed with flying colours if it tests how much they want to come over, live, grow, improve the country. 

If it's to test how quickly they are prepared to be White, Christian and abandoning their Allah... well that's the same test those idiots clerics back home also uses, just reverse the colour and adopting the crescent instead of the cross.


----------



## wayneL (15 August 2018)

Well unless there's a revolution you'll get the Dystopia you advocate.

Lets see how that turns out..  Hint,  watch Europe.


----------



## Tisme (15 August 2018)

wayneL said:


> Well unless there's a revolution you'll get the Dystopia you advocate.
> 
> Lets see how that turns out..  Hint,  watch Europe.




Well if you believe in Jebus, this is stage setting for the for the Tribulation


----------



## luutzu (15 August 2018)

wayneL said:


> Well unless there's a revolution you'll get the Dystopia you advocate.
> 
> Lets see how that turns out..  Hint,  watch Europe.




Europe, like much of the West, and pretty much every nation state and imperial hasbeen and wannabes.. are in decline - if we judge its wealth or decline based on the living standards of its plebs rather than its lords and barons... they're in decline not because of refugees, illegal immigrants and whatever ethnic minority that's currently on the radar.

They decline because the social system got hijacked; public treasury spent abroad massacring savages for the business aka. national, interest aren't bringing the returns they used to.

i.e. those in charge take the taxpayers' cash, spent it on subjugating natives abroad, send in the entrepreneurs to exploit and most of it remain abroad. 

The kind of imperialism where you create banana republics were somewhat, slightly, effective when the capitalists have some sense of love for their race; taxes were somewhat collected because the offshore havens weren't yet established.

Nowadays, the state send its (poor's) blood and its (working poor's) treasure abroad... and the only thing that comes back are the few illegals whose country got so properly liberated they can't live there anymore.


----------



## Wysiwyg (15 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> Europe, like much of the West, and pretty much every nation state and imperial hasbeen and wannabes.. are in decline - if we judge its wealth or decline based on the living standards of its plebs rather than its lords and barons... they're in decline not because of refugees, illegal immigrants and whatever ethnic minority that's currently on the radar.
> 
> They decline because the social system got hijacked; public treasury spent abroad massacring savages for the business aka. national, interest aren't bringing the returns they used to.
> 
> ...



Horse chit.


----------



## luutzu (16 August 2018)

Wysiwyg said:


> Horse chit.




Some hard facts my good man. Hard facts.


----------



## Tisme (16 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> A person close to me know of a friend who was very happy when she finally rediscovered her Jewish roots. Married a very religious guy... then soon enough regretted it. Her life was threatened when she wanted a divorce from both himself and his faith.




That mirrors the experience of a couple I knew. He ended up forcing the marriage to become one of those strict Jewish codes, him growing a Herod beard, wearing a skull cap and bagging her up in head to toe. Otherwise normal Australians who went down the hysterical route because of the rise of Islam.


----------



## Tisme (16 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> Some hard facts my good man. Hard facts.




Like it or not the top end cultural and innovation centres are still western societies, predominately those with innate or adopted British thinking.


----------



## luutzu (16 August 2018)

Tisme said:


> Like it or not the top end cultural and innovation centres are still western societies, predominately those with innate or adopted British thinking.




Give China another couple decades and they will have downloaded all the tech and brainpower to leap frog ahead though.

All the big tech companies are scrambling into China. Opening up their source codes, secret hash and surveillance tech to please the comrades for promises of a slice of them billion+ people.

Then you have racist, anti-immigrant politics all over the West. That's not going to attract high minded people whether they're black or white. 

My brother-in-law's younger brother is considering whether he should take a scholarship to study in the US or in Beijing. A decade ago there's just no question that you'd go to the US... now they're considering which police state is a better deal. 

You know what the Chinese says... empire wax and wane. Those that used to ruled the world soon find themselves becoming their former peasants' vassal coolies.


----------



## Tisme (16 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> Give China another couple decades and they will have downloaded all the tech and brainpower to leap frog ahead though.
> 
> All the big tech companies are scrambling into China. Opening up their source codes, secret hash and surveillance tech to please the comrades for promises of a slice of them billion+ people.
> 
> ...





Places like San Fran are awash with money to throw at new ideas and enterprise, and it's not govt stained money, but free capital.


----------



## luutzu (16 August 2018)

Tisme said:


> Places like San Fran are awash with money to throw at new ideas and enterprise, and it's not govt stained money, but free capital.




So's Beijing and other Chinese cities I can't pronounce.

Western Venture capitalists are heading East. Quite a few of them are in on the IPO game where they float overpriced, useless companies on unsuspecting US/Western fund managers.


----------



## wayneL (16 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> Give China another couple decades and they will have downloaded all the tech and brainpower to leap frog ahead though.
> 
> All the big tech companies are scrambling into China. Opening up their source codes, secret hash and surveillance tech to please the comrades for promises of a slice of them billion+ people.
> 
> ...



Cultural appropriation, eh?


----------



## luutzu (16 August 2018)

wayneL said:


> Cultural appropriation, eh?




The very best.

I still remember my brother and I having a good laugh when we heard Bill Gates was willing to let the Chinese examine its Windows source code a decade or two ago. You know, for security purposes.

Soon we're going to see "WooDows" 

But ey, it's not like the West doesn't steal anything and make it their own. 

No tea, no coffee... how does anyone start the day or look cultured without them? 

And now this....

$675B for the Pentagon [though it's actually $712B give or take a few space force starter pack]

$182B for both Labor, Health & Human Services, Education, and other agencies.

Priorities ey?

BUT there's worst...

Trump threatens to veto it if that damn $182B aren't reduced.

Why the heck are we spending so lavishly on all those other human services, education and stuff when we need every last billion for that $25B wall, more arms to the middle east and everywhere.

Can't make these stuff up. 


*Senate to consider massive spending bill, faces Trump objections*
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. senators agreed on Wednesday to debate and vote in the next few days on more than $850 billion in spending on defense, labor and healthcare programs, as the Trump administration announced its objections to some parts of the bill.

The so-called “minibus” appropriations bill includes nearly $675 billion in spending for the Department of Defense, as well as about $182 billion for an array of domestic programs under the departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and related agencies. 

Congressional aides said the Senate combined the two bills in the hope that President Donald Trump would not veto the domestic spending measure.

Trump has threatened to shut down the government if Congress, which is controlled by his fellow Republicans, does not adhere to his spending priorities, especially his desire to spend billions of dollars to build a wall on the border with Mexico.

On Wednesday, his administration announced its position on the bill. While not threatening a veto, the “Statement of Administration Policy” noted that the bill does not include administration proposals to reduce spending in areas such as education and healthcare research...

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ing-bill-faces-trump-objections-idUSKBN1L02CP


----------



## wayneL (16 August 2018)

I don't mind the appropriation,  Grasshopper,  such is the way of the world. 

It's  the gross hypocrisy of your mob on the topic.


----------



## luutzu (16 August 2018)

wayneL said:


> I don't mind the appropriation,  Grasshopper,  such is the way of the world.
> 
> It's  the gross hypocrisy of your mob on the topic.




What mob? I'm on the good side Sifu.


----------



## moXJO (19 August 2018)

Social media and search engines are beginning mass culling of accounts they deem too far right.
Apparently Avi yemini was caught up in it as well.
The Southern Poverty Law Center (soros funded) has been blacklisting people. They started of with nazis, which is fair enough. But have now turned more political and banning anyone not with the progressive agenda.

Interesting turn. And heading for disaster imo.


----------



## Tisme (19 August 2018)

moXJO said:


> Social media and search engines are beginning mass culling of accounts they deem too far right.
> Apparently Avi yemini was caught up in it as well.
> The Southern Poverty Law Center (soros funded) has been blacklisting people. They started of with nazis, which is fair enough. But have now turned more political and banning anyone not with the progressive agenda.
> 
> Interesting turn. And heading for disaster imo.




Wots so "progressive" about creating herd societies?


----------



## wayneL (19 August 2018)

Time to go to alternative platforms.  I just went over to gab and bitchute. 

Freespeech reigns.


----------



## basilio (19 August 2018)

wayneL said:


> Time to go to alternative platforms.  I just went over to gab and bitchute.
> 
> Freespeech reigns.




Excellent!! Delighted to hear you have found a place with like minded souls.

I hope you enjoy their company.

Good luck and Bon Voyage..


----------



## wayneL (19 August 2018)

basilio said:


> Excellent!! Delighted to hear you have found a place with like minded souls.
> 
> I hope you enjoy their company.
> 
> Good luck and Bon Voyage..



Difference,  they won't censor you either bas. 

Free speech bro.


----------



## cynic (20 August 2018)

basilio said:


> Excellent!! Delighted to hear you have found a place with like minded souls.
> 
> I hope you enjoy their company.
> 
> Good luck and Bon Voyage..



You know bas, much as I enjoy being in rapport with the like minded, I do also, at times, actually gain same benefit from having my views challenged by others.

There can be some value in forgoing the indulgence of immersing oneself into an insulated environment, where only one's chosen perspective is allowed.

Consider what happened in pepperland:



Can you see how this may serve as a cautionary tale, with relevance to certain ideologies that have come back into fashion in recent times?


----------



## Tisme (20 August 2018)

cynic said:


> You know bas, much as I enjoy being in rapport with the like minded, I do also, at times, actually gain same benefit from having my views challenged by others.
> 
> There can be some value in forgoing the indulgence of immersing oneself into an insulated environment, where only one's chosen perspective is allowed.
> 
> ...




For the thinking man, views aren't a straight line between polar opposites ... more like a ball of spaghetti between spoon and fork...... one or two individuals do tend to emulate a single thread of capellini.


----------



## dutchie (20 August 2018)

Facebook Threatened By New Social Network That Will RESTORE Freedom To the Internet


----------



## Tisme (20 August 2018)

dutchie said:


> Facebook Threatened By New Social Network That Will RESTORE Freedom To the Internet





minds.com immediately shows "Google Analytics" is trying to monitor, but can't establish it, as seen by my tracker software


----------



## wayneL (22 August 2018)

Couldn't think of a good place to put this, but,  interesting observation


----------



## sptrawler (22 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> Europe, like much of the West, and pretty much every nation state and imperial hasbeen and wannabes.. are in decline - if we judge its wealth or decline based on the living standards of its plebs rather than its lords and barons... they're in decline not because of refugees, illegal immigrants and whatever ethnic minority that's currently on the radar.




They are in decline, because of their affluence, same as the reason every other society has declined.
Their affluence breeds laziness, it breeds lack of application and it encourages those from less fortunate areas to aspire to get there.
Pretty simple really, human nature.


----------



## dutchie (22 August 2018)

Impassioned speech by Jordan Peterson. Especially important at the end.

*On the Vital Necessity of Free Speech*


----------



## Wysiwyg (22 August 2018)

> luutzu said: ↑
> Europe, like much of the West, and pretty much every nation state and imperial hasbeen and wannabes.. are in decline - if we judge its wealth or decline based on the living standards of its plebs rather than its lords and barons... they're in decline not because of refugees, illegal immigrants and whatever ethnic minority that's currently on the radar.



Horsechit.


----------



## luutzu (22 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> They are in decline, because of their affluence, same as the reason every other society has declined.
> Their affluence breeds laziness, it breeds lack of application and it encourages those from less fortunate areas to aspire to get there.
> Pretty simple really, human nature.




A good talk from Bill Black. Former White-Color crime prosecutor; now some professor in the US.

*The Best Way to Steal the Bank is to Own One.*

$11 USD Trillion stolen from US taxpayers from bailout.
10M jobs lost
some 10M families lost their home - their largest asset, life's savings.
How much of people's pensions were lost? Who cares.
Did anyone went to prison? Did they get bonuses? Free money to keep at it, again?
All the welfare payment, the refugees and other leaners are chump change.


----------



## luutzu (22 August 2018)

Wysiwyg said:


> Horsechit.




Lao Tzu says, the highest truth are rarely known. 

Well, in this case it's right in front of our eyes but we just can't believe it. I mean, Capitalists are greedy? No way!


----------



## sptrawler (22 August 2018)

Singapore has a welfare system, just most are too proud to avail themselves of it, apparently.

Jeez what is wrong with them? lol

Come to Australia, you will soon get over that mental block, you will become one of the unfortunates.


----------



## luutzu (23 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Singapore has a welfare system, just most are too proud to avail themselves of it, apparently.
> 
> Jeez what is wrong with them? lol
> 
> Come to Australia, you will soon get over that mental block, you will become one of the unfortunates.




Maybe 'cause they all have a job that pays a living wage. 

Can't afford to be too proud when an average house costs you one lifetime to pay off; the weekly rent would take almost one entire week's after tax earnings. 

We're told that wealth, and tax dollars, are trickling down. That's not true at all. 

But let's just ignore the statistics and policies. Imagine if you're one of the billionaires. You got the ears and nuts of every politicians; got the counsel and lobbying power money can buy... would you just let politicians or anyone else decide what to do with your tax dollars? Or decide what to do with other people's tax dollars?

I bet you're going to tell them that what's good for you will, ultimately, somehow, be good for everyone else. And if it wouldn't be, it's going to be good for the career politician dream of keeping a job or getting a seat at some board. 

I mean, would we believe that those billionaire Chinese in Beijing, or those Russian oligarchs or Arab Sheiks and princelings... that they're not out for themselves at the costs of every single last one of their citizen? What make our barons and heiress any different? Because we're a democracy?


----------



## sptrawler (23 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> Maybe 'cause they all have a job that pays a living wage.




That's not true Iutzu, I have asked old people cleaning the streets, early in the morning in Singapore why. They say because I can, a weird concept I know.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johngo...lternative-to-the-welfare-state/#721a7fa776c0


----------



## sptrawler (23 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> Can't afford to be too proud when an average house costs you one lifetime to pay off; the weekly rent would take almost one entire week's after tax earnings.



What will you be complaining about if Sydney house prices half? When interest rates go up, when the dollar falls and industry closes down.
There will always be something to complain about, that's life, you have to decide the best options for you going forward.
Not bitch about the options available, they will never be easy, that's life.
If it was easy, everyone would be sitting on a beach sucking on a stubby.


----------



## luutzu (23 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> That's not true Iutzu, I have asked old people cleaning the streets, early in the morning in Singapore why. They say because I can, a weird concept I know.
> 
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/johngo...lternative-to-the-welfare-state/#721a7fa776c0




"By embracing free trade, capital formation, vigorous meritocratic education, low taxes, and a reliable judicial system, Lee raised the per capita income of his country from $500 a year to some $52,000 a year today. ..."

Australia, the US etc. doesn't have those?

Real wages have been flat-lined since the late 1970s. Costs of living up; cost of education, healthcare etc. etc. up. So we either no longer have a free market, capitalism goodness... or we have too much of it.

If you google any major corporations you cared to, you will find, in the business press, that they all receive government subsidies. All of them. 

Amazon twist arms and smash heads of local and state gov't to give it tax subsidies, free land, this and all that just to get it to open a distribution. And no, it's not always good for the local business once they moved in either.

Google receives about $900M, from memory, a year from the US gov't to keep its data centre open. On and on and on.

Those are the good kind of welfare. Those few crumbs for the poor and the needy... why that's just wrong.


----------



## luutzu (23 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> What will you be complaining about if Sydney house prices half? When interest rates go up, when the dollar falls and industry closes down.
> There will always be something to complain about, that's life, you have to decide the best options for you going forward.
> Not bitch about the options available, they will never be easy, that's life.
> If it was easy, everyone would be sitting on a beach sucking on a stubby.




Pointing out facts is not complaining or whining. Does a person need to be all cheery and positive when discussing, I don't know, reality? Facts are what they are.

So if we want to have a serious discussion about the state of the economy, why we're in a decline, if we are... might want to get the fact straight before assigning blame. 

anyway


----------



## Tisme (23 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Singapore has a welfare system, just most are too proud to avail themselves of it, apparently.
> 
> Jeez what is wrong with them? lol
> 
> Come to Australia, you will soon get over that mental block, you will become one of the unfortunates.





In fairness ... you been to Singapore ?  Retire to wot?


----------



## Tink (21 November 2018)

Wedding magazine closes after refusing to feature same-sex couples

https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/g...s/news-story/c23855fc8005ec07d3cfa5144eef63b2

https://whitemag.com/blog/official-...CXPcCX9i6vL1WnFWRFl0PzoLz6y6aA&v=6cc98ba2045f


----------



## jbocker (21 November 2018)

Tink said:


> Wedding magazine closes after refusing to feature same-sex couples
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/g...s/news-story/c23855fc8005ec07d3cfa5144eef63b2
> 
> https://whitemag.com/blog/official-statement/?q=/blog/official-statement/&fbclid=IwAR2CmGUawbKXrskggx-li8aSDBdjOCXPcCX9i6vL1WnFWRFl0PzoLz6y6aA&v=6cc98ba2045f



Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. Did they not get the gist of what the majority accepts nowadays?


----------



## SirRumpole (21 November 2018)

Tink said:


> Wedding magazine closes after refusing to feature same-sex couples
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/g...s/news-story/c23855fc8005ec07d3cfa5144eef63b2
> 
> https://whitemag.com/blog/official-statement/?q=/blog/official-statement/&fbclid=IwAR2CmGUawbKXrskggx-li8aSDBdjOCXPcCX9i6vL1WnFWRFl0PzoLz6y6aA&v=6cc98ba2045f





If the gay community doesn't like what a particular magazine says then they should start their own instead of expecting everyone else to do their bidding.

Talk about arrogance. Let them get out and attract advertisers instead of trying to ruin someone else.


----------



## Tink (22 November 2018)

“Nothing will change when SSM is legalised.”

“Stop fearmongering – this will not affect you.”

“Allowing SSM to marry will not impact anyone else.”

As you can see they have written their reasoning on their site.

https://whitemag.com/blog/official-...CXPcCX9i6vL1WnFWRFl0PzoLz6y6aA&v=6cc98ba2045f


----------



## PZ99 (22 November 2018)

Their reasoning is self inflicted. No one confiscated their freedom to stay online or not.


----------



## cynic (22 November 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Their reasoning is self inflicted. No one confiscated their freedom to stay online or not.



Seriously?!!
I trust you are aware of how different the response would be, if a business publishing material featuring LGBT couples, cited the bullying of their advertisers and contributors, as the primary reason for their closure.

So much for the happier, inclusive society that we were all promised!


----------



## PZ99 (22 November 2018)

cynic said:


> Seriously?!!
> I trust you are aware of how different the response would be, if a business publishing material featuring LGBT couples, cited the bullying of their advertisers and contributors, as the primary reason for their closure.
> 
> So much for the happier, inclusive society that we were all promised!



The first form of "bullying" I saw was when someone shoved a pie in a CEO's face for espousing LGBT views as posters on their products.

Please show me the post where you've condemned this bullying please.

Otherwise your last sentence has no credibility.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 November 2018)

I think Alan Joyce probably bullied Qantas staff and customers to support his personal campaign.

In my view his actions were a serious breach of his corporate responsibilities.

I haven't seen him use Qantas to campaign for homeless people or for less domestic violence or anything else not affecting him.


----------



## cynic (22 November 2018)

PZ99 said:


> The first form of "bullying" I saw was when someone shoved a pie in a CEO's face for espousing LGBT views as posters on their products.
> 
> Please show me the post where you've condemned this bullying please.
> 
> Otherwise your last sentence has no credibility.



I believe this post to the SSM thread, made my contempt for such behaviour perfectly clear:


cynic said:


> In years gone by, despite my cultural upbringing, I had considerable sympathy for the homosexual community, largely on account of the needless verbal and physical abuse to which I know that many had been subjected. Our society has become noticably more supportive of the needs of that community and it seems that roles have reversed with the  once persecuted now transmuting themselves into persecutors.
> 
> Recent developments have alerted me to the tendency, of some members of that community, to overlook the fact that society doesn't only exist to accomodate the needs of homosexuals - heterosexuals of all ages and backgrounds also have needs!
> 
> ...


----------



## PZ99 (22 November 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> I think Alan Joyce probably bullied Qantas staff and customers to support his personal campaign.



That's a pretty big call mate. I've seen nothing like that.




SirRumpole said:


> In my view his actions were a serious breach of his corporate responsibilities.
> 
> I haven't seen him use Qantas to campaign for homeless people or for less domestic violence or anything else not affecting him.



I have. On both counts.

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media-releases/qantas-food-resq-program-feeds-thousands-in-need/

big businesses such as Telstra, Woolworths and Qantas came out in support of paid domestic violence leave > http://theconversation.com/domestic-violence-leave-gains-support-but-lets-do-it-right-51251


----------



## SirRumpole (22 November 2018)

PZ99 said:


> I have. On both counts.




Alan Joyce has my apologies on those two matters.

But he still used the shareholder's funds for political purposes on gay marriage.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-21/same-sex-marriage-alan-joyce-yes-campaign-support/8826682


----------



## PZ99 (22 November 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Alan Joyce has my apologies on those two matters.
> 
> But he still used the shareholder's funds for political purposes on gay marriage.
> 
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-21/same-sex-marriage-alan-joyce-yes-campaign-support/8826682



So did hundreds of other companies. They are board decisions in any case.

And on the NO vote I'm pretty sure Rupert Murdoch used similar funds for similar reasons.

Anyway, that's my last post on this subject. Last time this debate was had it nearly ruined the site... and it will always be someone elses fault.

And I'm getting covered with dust... :cough:


----------



## SirRumpole (22 November 2018)

PZ99 said:


> And I'm getting covered with dust... :cough:




Yeah, it's a bit chokey out Orange way too.

coffin right back at you.


----------



## Tink (3 December 2018)

*Paris riots*

_There are calls for a state of emergency and the army to be deployed in France after landmarks were attacked during intense riots.

French President Emmanuel Macron has asked for an evaluation of possible protest security measures, a day after a Paris protest against increased taxes and living costs devolved into France’s worst urban riot in a decade._

https://www.news.com.au/finance/eco...s/news-story/81b7ce233135813099177e306799d988


----------



## luutzu (3 December 2018)

Tink said:


> *Paris riots*
> 
> _There are calls for a state of emergency and the army to be deployed in France after landmarks were attacked during intense riots.
> 
> ...




The riots might just be in Paris, but the protests all over France though. 

Beggaring the plebs might not work out too well. You'd think the French should know that better than most.


----------



## wayneL (3 December 2018)

luutzu said:


> The riots might just be in Paris, but the protests all over France though.
> 
> Beggaring the plebs might not work out too well. You'd think the French should know that better than most.



I gather sales of sharpening stones and large wicker baskets have spiked all over France.


----------



## luutzu (3 December 2018)

wayneL said:


> I gather sales of sharpening stones and large wicker baskets have spiked all over France.




The mainstream media, and I'm guessing the gov't itself, is blaming this on that hippie Macron going "green" by taxing diesel. No doubt he also approve subsidies to electric vehicles every average Frenchie can easily afford too. 

From some of the interviews, seems the peasants are fed up with not having enough left over after a month's work. Taxes and bills rising, cannot make ends meet... and now a tax on their fuel to get to work. 

Maybe a section of the protestors went violent... but I wouldn't put it pass the Interior Ministry getting a few agents in, setting a few cars on fire.. then send in the troops to bring peace and order. If so, dangerous game, no? The crackdown might set off the entire place. There's enough dead wood for that to happen.

Also read on Reuters on Chinese tourist not being happy about her shopping tour of Paris being ruined by the riots. She and her partner just landed and was thinking of whether to shop in Paree or jet straight to Milan


----------



## basilio (7 December 2018)

*The quality of education in 2018.  A more creative range of protest posters*

"I've seen smarter cabinets at Ikea"
"We'd be less activist if you be less xhit"
"We only have ONE world - Don't xuck it up"
"Clean up our Planet.It's not Uranus"

*Students strike for climate change protests, defying calls to stay in school*

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11...limate-change-protest-scott-morrison/10571168


----------



## wayneL (7 December 2018)

Nineteeneightyfour... the replacement religion.

Orwell was surely a prophet, abeit politically misguided himself.


----------



## basilio (2 January 2019)

This story on Polarization in Poland is worth reading.  It documents haw a country can be divided when authoritarian leaders come to power and demonise all opposition.

*A Warning From Europe: The Worst Is Yet to Come*
Polarization. Conspiracy theories. Attacks on the free press. An obsession with loyalty. Recent events in the United States follow a pattern Europeans know all too well.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/10/poland-polarization/568324/


----------



## Logique (3 January 2019)

wayneL said:


> Nineteeneightyfour... the replacement religion.
> Orwell was surely a prophet, abeit politically misguided himself.



That he was. We are well along the pathway he foresaw.
The _Gilets Jaune_ is a response to this.
Pres Bolsonaro just elected in Brazil.
I doubt the UK is the only Euro Union nation looking to the exits.
The climate change catastrophist claims have risen to near hysteria.


----------



## basilio (3 January 2019)

Logique said:


> The climate change catastrophist claims have risen to near hysteria.



And the head in the sand, fingers in the ears, " La, La La"  denialists just swallow another Trump tweet and ignore a world that is cooking in front of their (closed) eyes.


----------



## wayneL (3 January 2019)

It's an interesting ideological war right now logique. 

The front line seems to center around tech (silicon valley behemoths); no more so than the Patreon/Mastercard/Paypal debacle, Patreon having scored a massive own goal and perhaps commiting financial suicide.


----------



## Logique (14 January 2019)

The courage of this young Canadian woman, standing up for free speech, nearly sacked by her university because of it. She speaks well







> *The lessons Lindsay Shepherd learned*
> Posted on 12:10 pm, January 12, 2019 by Steve Kates: http://catallaxyfiles.com/2019/01/12/the-lessons-lindsay-shepherd-learned/
> ..She became famous for *showing a sixty second video of Jordan Peterson to a university class*, for which she was almost sacked and would have been except she had taped the inquisition with the three-person tribunal who had tried to do her over. She has learned a very great deal since that time.


----------



## Logique (21 January 2019)

Don't laugh, they're working on it! The author forgot meat, and Y chromosomes







> *Top 10 Things Liberals Will Try To Ban Within The Next Decade*
> Kurt  Schlichter Kurt Schlichter - Jan 10, 2019 https://townhall.com/columnists/kur...ll-try-to-ban-within-the-next-decade-n2538737
> 10. Pets
> 9. All-Male Sports
> ...


----------



## wayneL (21 January 2019)

Logique said:


> Don't laugh, they're working on it! The author forgot meat, and Y chromosomes



Laying the foundations for a takover from true toxic masculinity... You know, the ones who get a free pass from the left.


----------



## Logique (2 February 2019)

Hard to feel much sympathy for Ms Prior, who lost and had costs awarded against her. Or Ms Triggs.







> 1 Feb 2019 - Cindy Prior declared bankrupt years after telling QUT students to leave computer lab. Six years after an admin worker accused a group of students of racial discrimination, she’s admitted the legal bill has become too much.
> News.com.au: Natalie Wolfe@natwolfe94


----------



## Knobby22 (2 February 2019)

Logique said:


> Hard to feel much sympathy for Ms Prior, who lost and had costs awarded against her. Or Ms Triggs.



Gillian Triggs will go down as a failure in her role. Continual poor judgement.
I'll probably get sued for saying that.
Being wealthy and now a commissioner for Aboriginal and Torres Straits maybe she could think of providing help to single mum Ms Prior who presumably received advice from her.


----------



## basilio (26 February 2019)

Fall out from the Cardinal Pell trial will start soon.
Dozens of journalists and local Media attempted to circumvent the suppression order after Pell was found guilty of child sex abuse in Dec 2018.
They will now have to explain their actions.

* Dozens of journalists accused of breaking Pell suppression order face possible jail terms *
Prosecutors send letters to up to 50 editors and reporters at News Corp, ABC and others

• Follow live updates on the reaction to Cardinal George Pell’s conviction
• Full report: Pell found guilty of child sexual assault
• Five times guilty: how Pell’s past caught up with him
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...al-suppression-order-face-possible-jail-terms


----------



## moXJO (26 February 2019)

basilio said:


> Fall out from the Cardinal Pell trial will start soon.
> Dozens of journalists and local Media attempted to circumvent the suppression order after Pell was found guilty of child sex abuse in Dec 2018.
> They will now have to explain their actions.
> 
> ...



Isn’t this similar to tommy Robinsons case?


----------



## basilio (26 February 2019)

moXJO said:


> Isn’t this similar to tommy Robinsons case?




There could be ..

Couple of significant differences
1)  "Tommy Robinson" had already talked about people being tried  before the end of a case,been found guilty of contempt  and warned very specifically that you can't do that.
2) He then did it again in violation of the law and after his first warning. I suggest that is why they threw the book at him

The suppression order on the outcome of the first Cardinal Pell trial was made to ensure  that, as far as possible, Pell received a fair trial for another sex abuse case. This  case  wassupposed to be begin in February this year and the judge wanted to keep the guilty outcome of the December case quiet to not taint a new witness pool.

*That principle is well understood  and essential for fair treatment of the accused. Local media that attempted to expose Cardinal Pell were indeed in contempt of court. The will need to explain why they tried to expose Cardinal Pell's conviction when he was due to face another trial.*

The reason why the suppression order was lifted was because the second trial won't go ahead. The judge has ruled particular evidence by the prosecution inadmissible. The prosecution has decided that without this evidence they can't mount a convincing case. End of story.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02...y-cardinal-court-case-held-in-secret/10233118


----------



## moXJO (26 February 2019)

basilio said:


> There could be ..
> 
> Couple of significant differences
> 1)  "Tommy Robinson" had already talked about people being tried  before the end of a case,been found guilty of contempt  and warned very specifically that you can't do that.
> ...



Realistically, the legit jornos should know better. In saying that I  wouldn’t sentence them.
May the pedos rot in hell.


----------



## basilio (6 March 2019)

*Morrison government bans Milo Yiannopoulos from entering Australia*
Bevan ShieldsMarch 6, 2019 — 2.36pm

Send via Email
The Morrison government has banned right-wing provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos from entering Australia in a fresh crackdown likely to infuriate his conservative supporters but please critics who believe he is anti-Semitic.

_The Sydney Morning Herald_ and_ The Age_ can reveal the controversial speaker was told this week his visa application had been rejected and he cannot enter Australia.
https://www.canberratimes.com.au/po...-from-entering-australia-20190306-p5124z.html


----------



## wayneL (6 March 2019)

Slowly we inch...


----------



## rederob (6 March 2019)

wayneL said:


> Slowly we inch...



The 1958 Migration Act provides significant powers to Ministers to cancel visa applications.
To suggest this is *slowly inching* merely reflects an ignorance of the Act.


----------



## wayneL (7 March 2019)

rederob said:


> The 1958 Migration Act provides significant powers to Ministers to cancel visa applications.
> To suggest this is *slowly inching* merely reflects an ignorance of the Act.



Or your ignorance of my meaning. 

Don't make dumb assumptions.


----------



## rederob (7 March 2019)

wayneL said:


> Or your ignorance of my meaning.
> 
> Don't make dumb assumptions.



Try writing something more sensible - is it that hard?


----------



## wayneL (7 March 2019)

rederob said:


> Try writing something more sensible - is it that hard?



Anyone with any sort of an eye for nuance world known exactly what I'm saying, Rob. Which kind of proves my point... slowly we inch...


----------



## rederob (7 March 2019)

wayneL said:


> Anyone with any sort of an eye for nuance world known exactly what I'm saying, Rob. Which kind of proves my point... slowly we inch...



Really?
I never learned to write without meaning.
You have turned it into an art form.
So say exactly what you mean and stop skirting around the issue.


----------



## wayneL (7 March 2019)

rederob said:


> Really?
> I never learned to write without meaning.
> You have turned it into an art form.
> So say exactly what you mean and stop skirting around the issue.



I'll write what I feel I should write, or want to write. I'm not really concerned if you get it or not, and I don't consider you my target audience fwiw.


----------



## rederob (7 March 2019)

wayneL said:


> I'll write what I feel I should write, or want to write. I'm not really concerned if you get it or not, and I don't consider you my target audience fwiw.



Don't expect readers to disambiguate what you write when it's open to various interpretations.
It's plain sloppy.
You could have instead clarified for everyone what you intended, rather than bury it in your preferred *nuance*.
Your last few words above say a great deal about the type of person you are.  
If you don't write for others to read, maybe do not write to begin.


----------



## basilio (7 March 2019)

The target audience for Wayne is those who "get it" . Who understand that the world is going to "hell in a handbasket" because of the Post Modern influence of the Marxist/Feminist/ SJW/ Gender bent/ Islamic influencers who are whiteanting the proud Christian Traditions of a Once Great Civilisation.

You don't have to be "specific" to make this point. A touch on the nose, a nuanced response, a total poisonous rave from Milo or Tommy is all that is required isn't it ? 

The problem here was that the ScoMo government decided it could do without the Caped Christian Crusaders (CCC vs KKK  ?) so close to an election. Of course the local  CCC's are apoplectic  about being unable to have their say and spread the "gospel.


----------



## wayneL (7 March 2019)

basilio said:


> The target audience for Wayne is those who "get it" . Who understand that the world is going to "hell in a handbasket" because of the Post Modern influence of the Marxist/Feminist/ SJW/ Gender bent/ Islamic influencers who are whiteanting the proud Christian Traditions of a Once Great Civilisation.
> 
> You don't have to be "specific" to make this point. A touch on the nose, a nuanced response, a total poisonous rave from Milo or Tommy is all that is required isn't it ?
> 
> The problem here was that the ScoMo government decided it could do without the Caped Christian Crusaders (CCC vs KKK  ?) so close to an election. Of course the local  CCC's are apoplectic  about being unable to have their say and spread the "gospel.



Well bas,  apart from the absurd stawmanesque embellishments,  you're pretty close to the mark there.


----------



## bellenuit (7 March 2019)

wayneL said:


> Slowly we inch...




I wonder if the ABC  will campaign to have his visa reinstated so that Milo Yiannopoulos can speak?

After all, they allowed him to post a question in abstentia to Gordon Peterson at the start of Q&A last week.  I doubt it though.


----------



## explod (8 March 2019)

Interesting discussions are spreading on who's who and what.


----------



## bellenuit (8 March 2019)

explod said:


> Interesting discussions are spreading on who's who and what.




That doesn't make sense IMO. It's implying that young people and conservatives have the same opinion of what socialism is. Surely what young people are asking for in the context of those two requirements is regulated capitalism.


----------



## rederob (8 March 2019)

bellenuit said:


> That doesn't make sense IMO. It's implying that young people and conservatives have the same opinion of what socialism is. Surely what young people are asking for in the context of those two requirements is *regulated capitalism*.



As in communist China.


----------



## bellenuit (8 March 2019)

rederob said:


> As in communist China.




No, China is more like state capitalism. It is regulated not for the benefit of the people, but of the Communist Party. Sometimes those benefits coincide, but more often not. Ultimately the CP controls everything and as we know there is no opposition. By regulated capitalism I mean basically a capitalist system that is moderated so that excesses are curtailed with respect to workers rights, tenants rights etc.


----------



## basilio (10 March 2019)

The CCC have brought their wunderkid in from the cold.

Milo rides  again. Bring out the popcorn. 
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/n...p/news-story/55aa39171683717d165c347988f39831


----------



## bellenuit (10 March 2019)

basilio said:


> The CCC have brought their wunderkid in from the cold.
> 
> Milo rides  again. Bring out the popcorn.
> https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/n...p/news-story/55aa39171683717d165c347988f39831




That is good though? Freedom of speech is not just about allowing those we agree with to speak. It's all or nothing, with the exceptions of those actually promoting violence, not be confused with those acting violently because they don't want others to speak.


----------



## basilio (17 March 2019)

So.  In light of the Carefully Calculated Carnage  inflicted on men, women and children worshipers in  two New Zealand mosques and simulcast world wide :

*What will those on the right/ Centre Right of politics do to expose the maddies and stop this terrorism  from within their ranks?

*


----------



## bellenuit (17 March 2019)

basilio said:


> So.  In light of the Carefully Calculated Carnage  inflicted on men, women and children worshipers in  two New Zealand mosques and simulcast world wide :
> 
> *What will those on the right/ Centre Right of politics do to expose the maddies and stop this terrorism  from within their ranks?
> *




I suppose they will unreservedly condemn this atrocity, as they have done, and likely change the gun laws, or support changes to the gun laws as has been proposed by the NZ PM and was done by a Right wing PM in Australia when an atrocity of that nature happened. They will recognise (hopefully, but it seems to be the case) that the perpetrator was at the extreme end of their political spectrum and not pretend that it has nothing what so ever to do with politics of the right. It will be very unlikely that those on the Right / Centre Right will provide succour to those who might be complicit or in alignment with the perpetrator.


----------



## wayneL (17 March 2019)

basilio said:


> So.  In light of the Carefully Calculated Carnage  inflicted on men, women and children worshipers in  two New Zealand mosques and simulcast world wide :
> 
> *What will those on the right/ Centre Right of politics do to expose the maddies and stop this terrorism  from within their ranks?
> *



This  man did not come from the ranks of the right/center right... Pulleeeze. 

He self identifies as Eco fascist. That is not anything to do with the mainstream right.


----------



## moXJO (17 March 2019)

basilio said:


> So.  In light of the Carefully Calculated Carnage  inflicted on men, women and children worshipers in  two New Zealand mosques and simulcast world wide :
> 
> *What will those on the right/ Centre Right of politics do to expose the maddies and stop this terrorism  from within their ranks?
> *



Tell them to kill all lefties instead  
And anyway terror attacks are part and parcel of living in a big city.
Is that the comment you need and want?


----------



## basilio (17 March 2019)

wayneL said:


> This  man did not come from the ranks of the right/center right... Pulleeeze.
> 
> He self identifies as Eco fascist. That is not anything to do with the mainstream right.




Does that include Tommy Robinson and Co ? One Nation and the other groups demanding  Muslims leave Australia ?


----------



## basilio (17 March 2019)

moXJO said:


> Tell them to kill all lefties instead
> And anyway terror attacks are part and parcel of living in a big city.
> Is that the comment you need and want?




You can be classier than that MoKJo.
This guy was intent on making a big statement. He wanted to leave a visual legacy of what it was like to murder scores of people he classified as invaders.

*He wants to inspire scores of compatriots  to take the next step. *The question is whether they will be encouraged  to begin new massacres or will people with decency ensure they are stopped.


----------



## wayneL (17 March 2019)

basilio said:


> Does that include Tommy Robinson and Co ? One Nation and the other groups demanding  Muslims leave Australia ?



TR et al have never promoted violence. Stop being a putrid and divisive POS and conflating Tarrants murdering with anything else. 

Or shall we start conflating the left with Islamic terrorism?


----------



## moXJO (17 March 2019)

basilio said:


> You can be classier than that MoKJo.
> This guy was intent on making a big statement. He wanted to leave a visual legacy of what it was like to murder scores of people he classified as invaders.
> 
> *He wants to inspire scores of compatriots  to take the next step. *The question is whether they will be encouraged  to begin new massacres or will people with decency ensure they are stopped.



Those on the right are the only ones that will be able to move some of these guys away from the extremes through a lot of dialogue. Unfortunately groups have already infiltrated political parties  and have a very large following among young people. Being "pushed" and "shamed" has also caused the movement to be seen as an underground resistance. They see themselves as part of a war. And are training accordingly. 

With every ban, every sledge, every negative fake media story more are filtering over. There is also a huge propaganda effort being waged to capture more minds. 

Think its all school yard stuff... A senator is on board and the nationals were compromised. Goes a little higher than that. Leftists groups are also being infiltrated.

 As for the event that took place. Without getting long winded, its purpose was to divide. And push for what is known as "accelerationism". There is a large list of these guys that are close to activating. And its not "free speech"  causing it.



> And anyway terror attacks are part and parcel of living in a big city.



This comment was made by Sadiq Khan..

Kill all lefties a play on "kill all men".
The language is on both sides. And when you have one group in power and able to ban thought and speech it starts to cause a fight back.

I was working with a group to try and bring those on the extreme back. In the end it involved too much time that I didn't have. Changing someones views takes huge amounts of time and personal connection. You are also fighting against other groups filling their heads.
It felt like a waste of time in the end.

Center right and right will be the key to change. But them being vilified as "nazis"
simply makes them stand back.
 Look at Jordan peterson and how he is vilified. At what point of abuse do you get to before you say: "fvck the bull$hit let em burn". 
It gets worse and worse some more before it gets better.


----------



## basilio (17 March 2019)

moXJO said:


> Those on the right are the only ones that will be able to move some of these guys away from the extremes through a lot of dialogue




Agree. 
The hard question however is at what stage do people report a person they think is dangerously unstable, unable to be moved and presents a threat to society ?

Nothing easy here. I can understand your frustration.
The challenge is that political groups often have a range of members.  As you noted there are extreme groups that have infiltrated more mainstream organizations. And in happens in all groups.


----------



## basilio (17 March 2019)

On one level I wonder how the anti terrorist squads would view posters on 8 Chan who applaud the actions of the killer and download and refeed footage of the murder ? 

If that isn't incitement to violence I can't imagine what is.


----------



## moXJO (17 March 2019)

basilio said:


> Agree.
> The hard question however is at what stage do people report a person they think is dangerously unstable, unable to be moved and presents a threat to society ?
> 
> Nothing easy here. I can understand your frustration.
> The challenge is that political groups often have a range of members.  As you noted there are extreme groups that have infiltrated more mainstream organizations. And in happens in all groups.



And in my experience the kids of those on the extremes take up their parents views. My biggest worry is that once you reach a critical mass of extremists its next too impossible to stop it snowballing.


----------



## moXJO (17 March 2019)

basilio said:


> On one level I wonder how the anti terrorist squads would view posters on 8 Chan who applaud the actions of the killer and download and refeed footage of the murder ?
> 
> If that isn't incitement to violence I can't imagine what is.





Its a very monitored site by security agencies. But extremely difficult to detect who will do what. There are darker sites out there.


----------



## DB008 (17 March 2019)

basilio said:


> *What will those on the right/ Centre Right of politics do to expose the maddies and stop this terrorism  from within their ranks?*




Are we on the same page or just being manipulated by the media?

This is a screen shot from part of his manifesto:


----------



## Darc Knight (17 March 2019)

wayneL said:


> TR et al have never promoted violence. Stop being a putrid and divisive POS and conflating Tarrants murdering with anything else.
> 
> Or shall we start conflating the left with Islamic terrorism?




It's pretty poor form. 50 people are DEAD, scores are injured and all Bas can do is pursue a personal vendetta firstly against Christians by falsely claiming the attack was done by a "caped Christian crusader" now pursuing vendettas against others.
Then she tries to play the victim herself.

Meanwhile every reasonable person is calling for calm.


----------



## bellenuit (17 March 2019)

Unbelievable attack on Chelsea Clinton.

Majiid has his say


----------



## explod (17 March 2019)

Can probably never ever change anything,  the presence of religions and cults besides money are the prime cause of hate and violence.  Kept apart no problems, bt as in "The Golden Bough" by Frazer, religion via the tribal witch doctor system were created and put in place to control the people.  The bigger ones under such things like the Bible allowed The Ruling lords to control who countries.

Once a child has been indoctrinated from the cradle then it's impossible without a good formal education to ever change that person.

We can take away all the guns and lock them up forever but new youngsters will continue to rise against their religious enemies.

We do know the answers, like climate change but because of control/power and "the money Ralf" it's just party time AS USUAL


----------



## basilio (17 March 2019)

So the manifesto  (allegedly) takes the killer across a wide range of political/social postures.  
What are we to make of it ?
That is he just a "normal white guy" who wants to protect his homeland from the invaders ?
That we should "understand" his position ? Sympathize with his righteousness? Follow his path ....  

I think it is a cunning piece of work. There is bit there for everyone isn't there. Left,  Right, Socialist, Nationalist. Certainly doesn't want to come across as a "maddie".  

Of course not. This is supposed to be a heroic, rational response to the invasion of the European homeland.

*Just shoot the xshit out of them in their places of worship.
*
IMV poisonous


----------



## moXJO (17 March 2019)

The songs he played on the car radio.
The finger signs in court.
The markings on his gun.
Location.
Manifesto.
His comments.

All designed to play media and social media. And to divide everyone further. A lot of it was 'in house' jokes.

There was a comment on 8chan that its time to push those at the center to pick a side. And it was time to push their agenda into the mainstream.
8Chan , 4chan all troll.


----------



## basilio (17 March 2019)

Darc Knight said:


> It's pretty poor form. 50 people are DEAD, scores are injured and all Bas can do is pursue a personal vendetta firstly against Christians by falsely claiming the attack was done by a "caped Christian crusader" now pursuing vendettas against others.
> Then she tries to play the victim herself.
> 
> Meanwhile every reasonable person is calling for calm.




You really have a bee in your bonnet DK. You may well fall off my Christmas Card list if you continue with this ...... stuff.

You have been told, repeatedly, the CCC line was not directed to Christians as such. OK ?  Is that clear. Stop messing about. It is not becoming of you.

Pursuing vendettas against others ? Puhluuze  !!  This guy comes from an extreme right wing play book. He is playing back into an audience that is volatile, dangerous and ready to rumble. MoXjo offered some of the  most sobering comments from, it seems, first hand understanding of the situation. I take his points seriously 

I think the queries I raise about how organisations  deal with the anger that has been created is valid.


----------



## Darc Knight (17 March 2019)

basilio said:


> You really have a bee in your bonnet DK. You may well fall off my Christmas Card list if you continue with this ...... stuff.
> 
> You have been told, repeatedly, the CCC line was not directed to Christians as such. OK ?  Is that clear. Stop messing about. It is not becoming of you.
> 
> ...




You're not worthwhile even listening to or replying to. It's all just self interest personal vendettas.


----------



## qldfrog (17 March 2019)

Just want to say
@moXJO  that you post #444 above is of premium lucidity and accuracy
Obviously will pass well above the head of our brainwashed left wing fanatics here


----------



## SirRumpole (17 March 2019)

I can see a lot of computer bots roaming through social media with analysis programs deciding who the crackpots are and whether they should be put on watch lists.

The Christchurch killer should have been identified as a possible subject of further investigation. Trouble is that there are a lot of crackpots and not enough resources.

Now NZ wakes up to the fact that it's gun laws are seriously out of date. They should have taken a lesson from Howard years ago.


----------



## Smurf1976 (17 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Now NZ wakes up to the fact that it's gun laws are seriously out of date. They should have taken a lesson from Howard years ago.



I hold Howard in reasonably high regard on account of that action alone.

Didn't agree with many of his ideas but it takes a real man to stand up to the gun lobby and he did so extremely well.


----------



## moXJO (17 March 2019)

moXJO said:


> My biggest worry is that once you reach a critical mass of extremists its next too impossible to stop it snowballing.



This covers all extremists. Imported or home made.


----------



## qldfrog (18 March 2019)

Which is why you try not to import people believing in a religion which clearly states that you convert and join them or die, but hey we all know i am wrong and europe is a shining example on how wrong i am.


----------



## Tink (18 March 2019)

I disagree with the Green's religion.

Jordan Peterson

_I will never use words I hate, like the trendy and artificially constructed words "zhe" and "zher." These words are at the vanguard of a post-modern, radical leftist ideology that I detest, and which is, in my professional opinion, frighteningly similar to the Marxist doctrines that killed at least 100 million people in the 20th century.

I have been studying authoritarianism on the right and the left for 35 years. I wrote a book, Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief, on the topic, which explores how ideologies hijack language and belief. As a result of my studies, I have come to believe that Marxism is a murderous ideology. I believe its practitioners in modern universities should be ashamed of themselves for continuing to promote such vicious, untenable and anti-human ideas, and for indoctrinating their students with these beliefs. I am therefore not going to mouth Marxist words. That would make me a puppet of the radical left, and that is not going to happen. Period_


https://www.aussiestockforums.com/posts/1014494/


----------



## Tink (8 April 2019)




----------



## Tink (9 April 2019)




----------



## basilio (11 April 2019)

Israel Falou has been sacked by Rugby Australia for an Instagram post that reflects his very strong religious beliefs...

_Israel Folau's decision to ignore Rugby Australia officials on Thursday led to the game's highest profile player being sacked in a dramatic fallout to a homophobic Instagram post.

Rugby Australia "terminated" Folau's contract after he failed to return calls, chief executive Raelene Castle saying the governing body had not heard from Folau since his anti-gay post.

It was another slap in the face for Rugby Australia officials, who gave Folau a chance to redeem himself after saying homosexuals would go to hell last year.

"In the absence of compelling mitigating factors, it is our intention to terminate his contract," Castle said.
_
https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6025806/terminated-folau-sacked-by-wallabies/?cs=14280


----------



## SirRumpole (11 April 2019)

Drunks eh ?

That includes about half the population.

What about murderers and rapists ?

Bogans ?


----------



## macca (12 April 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Drunks eh ?
> 
> That includes about half the population.
> 
> ...




Yes, most of our society does not fit that image at all, I do find it interesting that his beliefs are quite similar to Muslim beliefs.

I wonder are there any Muslims playing for Rugby Australia ?

Reading an article online it seems that it is acceptable to follow such religions but a player is not allowed to talk about it or post online on the subject.

Is that freedom of speech ?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (12 April 2019)

I must admit that apart from Homosexuality, Murder, Rape and Witchcraft, I would be in Israel Folau's naughty corner. 

I'm not interested in being homosexual.

I would find it difficult to kill someone, but murder would be out. 

Rape is heinous imo.

I suppose that just leaves witchcraft, but it's practitioners are surrounded by anti-vaxers, people who live in Byron Bay and old dolls who smell of mothballs. So that's out.

It's a tough world earning good moolah playing Rugby.

gg


----------



## rederob (12 April 2019)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I must admit that apart from Homosexuality, Murder, Rape and Witchcraft, I would be in Israel Folau's naughty corner.



How can that be a bad thing?  
"Hell" awaits us!
We would be there with other fornicators and adulterers and liars.  But keep our back's to the wall to avoid stabbing pains from themothas.


----------



## basilio (12 April 2019)

The conflict of the Rights of Religious Expression/Freedom of speech/ Hate speech is all coming together in the Israel Falou scenario. In fact it would make a brilliant Hypothetical !

*Israel Folau's sacking from rugby union isn't the end. Sport must deal with conflicting human rights*
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-12/israel-folau-conflicting-human-rights-tracey-holmes/10996228


----------



## lindsayf (12 April 2019)

basilio said:


> The conflict of the Rights of Religious Expression/Freedom of speech/ Hate speech is all coming together in the Israel Falou scenario. In fact it would make a brilliant Hypothetical !
> 
> *Israel Folau's sacking from rugby union isn't the end. Sport must deal with conflicting human rights*
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-12/israel-folau-conflicting-human-rights-tracey-holmes/10996228



Surely he did this because he wanted out of his contract?


----------



## Tink (25 May 2019)

Melbourne’s CBD ground to a halt today as a group called Extinction Rebellion hits the streets.

Hundreds of climate change activists staged a climate rally on the steps of State Parliament at midday, followed by a march through the city where they staged mass “die in” on the corner of Bourke Street and Swanston Street.

Demonstrators lay ‘dead’ on the road and tram tracks as a reminder of the earth’s extinction if nothing is done about climate change.

https://www.3aw.com.au/mass-climate-die-in-to-bring-cbd-to-a-halt/


----------



## macca (25 May 2019)

Not funny for those caught in traffic but quite funny to watch, the crowd looks to be having a good time.

Oh to be young and naive again


----------



## qldfrog (25 May 2019)

Naive or stupid?
The Hitlerian youth were having great fun in the mid 1930s
Never underestimate the power of crowds and the stupidity of individuals


----------



## rederob (26 May 2019)

qldfrog said:


> Naive or stupid?
> The Hitlerian youth were having great fun in the mid 1930s
> Never underestimate the power of crowds and the stupidity of individuals



Classic case if *false equivalence*, "liked" by those who we should never underestimate.


----------



## wayneL (26 May 2019)

Not when you consider their totalitarian obbjectives Robee


----------



## rederob (26 May 2019)

wayneL said:


> Not when you consider their totalitarian obbjectives Robee



I don't find much that you post to be credible.  It typically also lacks a logical base, as shown by this last one from you.
You might find that making a point which is also substantiated to be a more useful approach.


----------



## wayneL (26 May 2019)

rederob said:


> I don't find much that you post to be credible.  It typically also lacks a logical base, as shown by this last one from you.
> You might find that making a point which is also substantiated to be a more useful approach.



Oh Robee, it's because you are so ideologically one eyed, and as usual,  you have to play the man. That is also an argumentative fallacy,  you realise?


----------



## rederob (26 May 2019)

wayneL said:


> Oh Robee, it's because you are so ideologically one eyed, and as usual,  you have to play the man. That is also an argumentative fallacy,  you realise?



Again, baseless assertions and not consistent with logic.
If you have something to say which you are able to substantiate, then please go ahead.


----------



## wayneL (26 May 2019)

rederob said:


> Again, baseless assertions and not consistent with logic.
> If you have something to say which you are able to substantiate, then please go ahead.



Zzzz... Zzzz... Zzzz


----------



## Dark Knight 2.0 (26 May 2019)

wayneL said:


> Zzzz... Zzzz... Zzzz




I like you Wayne, but I gotta say, your debating Rob reminds me of Leo Wanker:
1. I admire the bravery
2. I appreciate the Comedy
3. But in the end you wind up douced by a fire extinguisher due to third degree burns


----------



## fiftyeight (26 May 2019)

Dark Knight 2.0 said:


> I like you Wayne, but I gotta say, your debating Rob reminds me of Leo Wanker:
> 1. I admire the bravery
> 2. I appreciate the Comedy
> 3. But in the end you wind up douced by a fire extinguisher due to third degree burns





I wonder how long until DK2 falls off the deep-end again and becomes DK3? Or we might get something really exciting like DK3D?


----------



## wayneL (26 May 2019)

Dark Knight 2.0 said:


> I like you Wayne, but I gotta say, your debating Rob reminds me of Leo Wanker:
> 1. I admire the bravery
> 2. I appreciate the Comedy
> 3. But in the end you wind up douced by a fire extinguisher due to third degree burns




Just another leftist tw@t with nothing but ad hom

zz...zzzz....zzzzz.....


----------



## Tink (28 July 2019)

New South Wales has just introduced tough new laws for activists who trespass on farms.

Under the new laws, trespassers will be handed a $1000 on-the-spot fine and individuals can be fined up to $220,000.

Corporations could be fined up to $440,000 for trespassing on farmland.

NSW is also considering jail time for repeat trespassers.

John Gommans, owner of the now closed Gippy Goat Cafe, which shut down after being targeted by activists, said he’d like to see Victoria introduce similar fines.

https://www.3aw.com.au/nsw-introduc...-terrorists-push-for-victoria-to-do-the-same/


----------



## SirRumpole (28 July 2019)

Tink said:


> New South Wales has just introduced tough new laws for activists who trespass on farms.
> 
> Under the new laws, trespassers will be handed a $1000 on-the-spot fine and individuals can be fined up to $220,000.
> 
> ...




Trespass is already against the law.

There is no point in passing new legislation to cover activities already dealt with by existing legislation.

Looks like a witch hunt to me.


----------



## SirRumpole (31 July 2019)

I saw nanny Kristina on the ABC tonight insisting that some so called hate speech merchant be prevented from entering Australia for saying that the Koran is evil.

Does she actually look around the world and see what people of that faith are doing, like fighting for ISIS, kidnapping children and forcing them to convert, mutilating children and other horrors.

The people are smart enough to decide for themselves whether what this guy says is true or not, we don't need Aunty Kristina to protect us from the truth.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07...winger-to-be-banned-from-the-country/11369066


----------



## Value Collector (1 August 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Trespass is already against the law.
> 
> There is no point in passing new legislation to cover activities already dealt with by existing legislation.
> 
> Looks like a witch hunt to me.





The government should spend more time finding out why the protestors are targeting these farms.

But, ofcourse they won’t, the government tends to just want to maintain the status quo, unless they are pushed ofcourse.

Peaceful noncompliance is the duty of all citizens when unjust laws exist.


----------



## qldfrog (1 August 2019)

I will use whatever freedom of speech to highlight this article
Corrupt Australia on the move
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08...enong-council-inspector-planted-slug/11265380


----------



## basilio (24 August 2019)

In case anyone missed it... one of the BIG news stories last week/this week was Alan Jones trashing the NZ PM Jacinda Ardern. As usual he took no prisoners. You can check out the full list of abuse on the SBS link below.

Well the laws of physics came to bear and The Mad ....ing Witches troupe decided enough was enough and started a campaign amongst @GB advertisers to jet them know exactly what their ads were supporting and that they wern't impressed.

Turns out many of the advertisers weren't either. It's cost 2 GB a bomb.  Fall out to date is a belated Alan Jones apology  (exactly as meaningless as anything else he says ) and a promise from his boss that another outrage like that will see Alan Jones lose his job.

Heartwarming stuff .

Big thank you to Peter Dutton. He was the inspiration for the Mad xxxxing witch movement.  Something he should be well proud of in my view.

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/the-fee...-should-give-jacinda-ardern-a-few-backhanders
ttps://www.news.com.au/finance/business/media/alan-jones-backhanders-episode-pulled-from-2gb-site/news-story/20ebb1b8eadb72681433825c4e368802
https://womensagenda.com.au/latest/the-mad-witches-orchestrating-the-alan-jones-boycott/
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...alling-journalist-a-mad-witch-in-text-message


----------



## wayneL (26 August 2019)

The leftist outrage mob doesn't take away the fact that AJ was spot on the money.  JA should put a sock in it and AJ should never have apologized.

My bitch is that the outrage is not equally applied, what with the outbursts from Clem and the silly pretend pirate, et al being given a pass.

It's time that pandering to snowflakes ceases.


----------



## basilio (26 August 2019)

wayneL said:


> The leftist outrage mob doesn't take away the fact that AJ was spot on the money.  JA should put a sock in it and AJ should never have apologized.
> 
> My bitch is that the outrage is not equally applied, what with the outbursts from Clem and the silly pretend pirate, et al being given a pass.
> 
> It's time that pandering to snowflakes ceases.



Supporting the vile rubbish AJ came out  Wayne ?  Does that  simply illustrates what a nasty piece of work you are ?
Anyway you don't have to upset that AJ apologised . It was his usual useless faux apology made just to appease the "offended" and keep his nulti million dollar job of being the biggest shock jock in town and Gods gift to the climate denial industry. 

And of course you managed to make a lie out of what was said by Alan Jones. His statement was "Someone should put a sock down her throat "not "Put a sock in it" .


----------



## wayneL (26 August 2019)

basilio said:


> Supporting the vile rubbish AJ came out  Wayne ?  Does that  simply illustrates what a nasty piece of work you are ?
> Anyway you don't have to upset that AJ apologised . It was his usual useless faux apology made just to appease the "offended" and keep his nulti million dollar job of being the biggest shock jock in town and Gods gift to the climate denial industry.
> 
> And of course you managed to make a lie out of what was said by Alan Jones. His statement was "Someone should put a sock down her throat "not "Put a sock in it" .



Nasty? 

Everyone knows I'm a sweetheart bas,  just with a sense of balance.

Every knows AJ misquoted the common idiom. But if "you" insist, lets stick with the sock down the throat.  That would be more palatable than 14 years in the slam for sharing a video. 

Also a bit less violent than all men should die (or whatever your favorite toxic feminist said,  repeatedly )


----------



## SirRumpole (27 August 2019)

In my view Alan Jones should have been taken off air after that appalling defamatory witch hunt on the Wagners in Qld backfired on him.

It was a shocking abuse of power that his station and the weak kneed broadcasting tribunal let him get away with.

Fake news, no regards for the facts, no evidence whatever, just malicious bile by a coward hyped up on his own inflated sense of self importance.

As for Jacinta Ardern, she has every right to express her opinion and have it judged on facts not the same righteous indignation from a fool who obviously hasn't learned any lessons whatever.

Just my opinion.


----------



## moXJO (27 August 2019)

Internet always finds a way...
Wonder what happens now?



> 3chan is anonymous uncensorable truly decentralized image board. No gas needed to post, no owner of the server, completely running on IPFS.





https://devpost.com/software/3chan


----------



## Tink (4 October 2019)

*‘It’s a police station honouring a police state’: Outrage as Melbourne cop shop raises Chinese Communist flag*

A Victorian police station has been slammed for “honouring a police state” by flying the flag of the Chinese Communist regime.

https://www.news.com.au/national/vi...g/news-story/7d59fc8558a59eec0693c26fb9dbf31c


----------



## wayneL (4 October 2019)

What do you call it when a state is forced to secede from a federation. Because that's what should happen to Victoria.


----------



## bi-polar (4 October 2019)

Police say that paddy wagons will fly the Aboriginal flag except on Ned Kelly Day and when Eureka flag is flown.  Vietnam flag is for Friday 13th.


----------



## wayneL (12 October 2019)

Good question:


----------



## Knobby22 (12 October 2019)

Tink said:


> *‘It’s a police station honouring a police state’: Outrage as Melbourne cop shop raises Chinese Communist flag*
> 
> A Victorian police station has been slammed for “honouring a police state” by flying the flag of the Chinese Communist regime.
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/national/vi...g/news-story/7d59fc8558a59eec0693c26fb9dbf31c



Box Hill is the heart of the Chinese community in Melbourne. You can walk down the street and only see Chinese.
Maybe the local police are trying to suck up to them.
Pretty pathetic.


----------



## Value Collector (12 October 2019)

Knobby22 said:


> You can walk down the street and only see Chinese.
> .




How can you tell if some one is Chinese or Australian just by walking past them in the street???


----------



## SirRumpole (12 October 2019)

No flag of another country should be flown from any building in Australia, unless there is an official visit of some sort.


----------



## Knobby22 (12 October 2019)

Value Collector said:


> How can you tell if some one is Chinese or Australian just by walking past them in the street???



You are right, I am close friends with a third generation guy with Cantonese heritage and he is as Aussie as you can get and I work with a Chinese born engineer who came here when he was 16 when his family escaped and he is Australian through and through.

I should have worded this better and I apologise. 

But you know what I mean. A strong Chinese heritage area.

The local member is the only Chinese heritage person in Parliament I believe, which will change over time.


----------



## Value Collector (13 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> No flag of another country should be flown from any building in Australia, unless there is an official visit of some sort.




I would agree with you if you said “government building”.

But when it comes to private buildings, people can fly what ever flag they like.


----------



## Value Collector (13 October 2019)

Knobby22 said:


> The local member is the only Chinese heritage person in Parliament I believe, which will change over time.




Sounds like a non issue then.

To be honest, I don’t care what heritage our citizens have.

An Australian citizen who happens to have Chinese heritage is no less of a citizen than a bloke whose grandad was Irish.

If you called me an Irishman, I would think you were nuts, I think you are just as nuts if you called your mate Chinese.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 October 2019)

Value Collector said:


> I would agree with you if you said “government building”.
> 
> But when it comes to private buildings, people can fly what ever flag they like.




Yes I meant to say government building.

However anyone flying the flag of another country on their proerty has to raise questions of "whose side are they on ?".


----------



## Knobby22 (13 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes I meant to say government building.
> 
> However anyone flying the flag of another country on their proerty has to raise questions of "whose side are they on ?".



It could be an Irish flag to celebrate their independence from Britain. 
It doesn't mean that they are disloyal orloyal to the Irish, it just means  they are sucking up to the locals with Irish background.

We as a nation are so fragile at the moment. I just came back from New Zealand and they are so confident and proud. It really brought it home to me.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 October 2019)

Knobby22 said:


> We as a nation are so fragile at the moment.




Absolutely. There are people trying to slice the country into little pieces and make us all fight each other.

We keep hearing about "the Muslim community" or the "Chinese community" or the "gay and lesbian community" etc as if each group have their own special needs that governments and the rest of society should pander to.

That's identity politics and it's rubbish. Governments should be looking after common interests and if people want to belong to a particular group, that's their problem that they have to look after themselves.


----------



## qldfrog (13 October 2019)

You can or not care about my input but after working in China for 2 years, i  think in the above you are making a fundamental mistake
While Australian from Chinese background can genuinely act feel and truly believe they are Australian, this is NOT how China see it.
For China, they are overseas Chinese, and they will stay so even after generations.
Han forever.
What better example than Taiwan?
I worked with a Malaysian born but
In China, he is an oversea Chinese
This is the reason China has no issue arresting various passport holders as long as they once were Chinese or are from Chinese background.
Or ask/demand them to act as mole or spy
In Shenzhen, there is an OCT
Overseas Chinese Town with chamber of commerce, hotels, even amusement park dedicated
And it is much used by enterprises owned by Chinese ethnic foreigners from the world over
Even reading the China Daily, you will find numerous references to this term:
Oversea Chinese
But what would i know


----------



## Knobby22 (13 October 2019)

Fascinating.


----------



## rederob (13 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> We keep hearing about "the Muslim community" or the "Chinese community" or the "gay and lesbian community" etc as if each group have their own special needs that governments and the rest of society should pander to.



These may well be legitimate communities, and the real issue is if their needs or concerns are being addressed or not by one-size-fits-all policies.  What is certain is that each one you named has faced ongoing discrimination for any number of reasons.


SirRumpole said:


> That's identity politics and it's rubbish. Governments should be looking after common interests and if people want to belong to a particular group, that's their problem that they have to look after themselves.



You have that arse about.
And the issue of "belonging" to a particular group is not about "wanting to" but, instead because it's obvious that they naturally fall into it.
Your idea that "that's their problem that they have to look after themselves" is nonsense unless you think we have anarchy instead of government.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 October 2019)

rederob said:


> And the issue of "belonging" to a particular group is not about "wanting to" but, instead because it's obvious that they naturally fall into it.




Religion is a choice robbie.




rederob said:


> Your idea that "that's their problem that they have to look after themselves" is nonsense unless you think we have anarchy instead of government.




It's not up to governments to favour particular groups, they have to provide standards of service that are equal for all.


----------



## rederob (13 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Religion is a choice robbie.



So what?
The feds are looking at legislation protecting religious freedoms!


SirRumpole said:


> It's not up to governments to favour particular groups, they have to provide standards of service that are equal for all.



Absolute nonsense - we are *not *all equal in society and that's exactly why governments have policies which address such iniquities.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 October 2019)

rederob said:


> The feds are looking at legislation protecting religious freedoms!




Yes, I don't agree with it.



rederob said:


> Absolute nonsense - we are *not *all equal in society and that's exactly why governments have policies which address such iniquities.




Such as ?


----------



## rederob (13 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, I don't agree with it.



Hardly the point, as it discredits your earlier remarks.







SirRumpole said:


> Such as ?



I hope that's not a serious question, as if it is, you should stop posting here,


----------



## Value Collector (13 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes I meant to say government building.
> 
> However anyone flying the flag of another country on their proerty has to raise questions of "whose side are they on ?".




One of my neighbours flys the USA flag on the 4th of July, he is a top bloke.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 October 2019)

rederob said:


> Hardly the point, as it discredits your earlier remarks.I hope that's not a serious question, as if it is, you should stop posting here,




Good old rob, ask a question, get an insult.

Well, pi$$ off then.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 October 2019)

Value Collector said:


> One of my neighbours flys the USA flag on the 4th of July, he is a top bloke.




Does he ever fly the Australian flag, as he happens to live here ?


----------



## rederob (13 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Good old rob, ask a question, get an insult.



Like I said, if you think that was a serious question then you are exceptionally ignorant of what the government has in place to address iniquities.
How about making informed comments and quit with your discriminatory and racist slants.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 October 2019)

rederob said:


> Like I said, if you think that was a serious question then you are exceptionally ignorant of what the government has in place to address iniquities.
> How about making informed comments and quit with your discriminatory and racist slants.




What racist slants are you talking about ?

Try and be specific instead of in vague asides.

All I'm saying is people should be treated equally regardless of what group they choose to place themselves in.

You have a problem with that ?


----------



## moXJO (13 October 2019)

I think they amount of politicians currently taking money from China indicates a larger problem.
I think the amount of Chinese money,  pro communist activists that mobilize quickly  and chinese business influence is a huge indicator that Aus has already sold out.


----------



## rederob (13 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> All I'm saying is people should be treated equally regardless of what group they choose to place themselves in.



You are rather confused then, because they are not all equal- whatever that is supposed to mean - and they are not being treated equally as a result.
You seem unable to grasp that!
Moreover, you are blaming them!


----------



## SirRumpole (13 October 2019)

moXJO said:


> I think they amount of politicians currently taking money from China indicates a larger problem.
> I think the amount of Chinese money,  pro communist activists that mobilize quickly  and chinese business influence is a huge indicator that Aus has already sold out.




Indeed. The revelations over Crown casino indicated that.

Funny how that issue has gone quiet isn't it ?


----------



## SirRumpole (13 October 2019)

rederob said:


> You are rather confused then, because they are not all equal- whatever that is supposed to mean - and they are not being treated equally as a result.
> You seem unable to grasp that!
> Moreover, you are blaming them!




No point in arguing with you. You are incapable of anything more than vague insults.


----------



## rederob (13 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> No point in arguing with you. You are incapable of anything more than vague insults.



You need to re-read the thread posts because you clearly *do not understand* what "identity politics" is, and whatever concept you have of "equal" is not reflected in the hundreds of measures that governments of every level have in place to address iniquities and discrimination at individual and community levels.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 October 2019)

rederob said:


> You need to re-read the thread posts because you clearly *do not understand* what "identity politics" is,




What's your definition ?

Whatever, it's just a quibble.

Once you treat certain groups differently, it only provokes the rest to say "what 
about us".

So it just creates divisions in society.


----------



## rederob (13 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Once you treat certain groups differently, it only provokes the rest to say "what about us".



Ok, who are you talking about?


----------



## SirRumpole (13 October 2019)

rederob said:


> Ok, who are you talking about?




The fuss about Gladys Liu for a start. Trying to pander to a particular demographic in that electorate. Added to flying the communist flag from one of our public buildings. Again pandering to a particular demographic.

Treating religion as a protected species with "religious freedom" laws, as if religious views should have a greater protection than say political or social views.


----------



## rederob (13 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> The fuss about Gladys Liu for a start. Trying to pander to a particular demographic in that electorate. Added to flying the communist flag from one of our public buildings. Again pandering to a particular demographic.
> 
> Treating religion as a protected species with "religious freedom" laws, as if religious views should have a greater protection than say political or social views.



Yep, you are a true racist.
There are protocols for flying foreign flags and they were followed to the letter in the case of Box Hill Police Station's actions.
As to the "fuss" about Lui, it was mostly about alleged breaches of the Electoral Act until the ABC also uncovered ties linking her to a secretive international influence arm of the Chinese Government. 
Apart from that nearly 45% of her electorate are overseas born with 20% having a Chinese background.  So if you are claiming "identity politics" in respect of Liu, what does it entail?


----------



## SirRumpole (13 October 2019)

rederob said:


> Yep, you are a true racist.
> There are protocols for flying foreign flags and they were followed to the letter in the case of Box Hill Police Station's actions.
> As to the "fuss" about Lui, it was mostly about alleged breaches of the Electoral Act until the ABC also uncovered ties linking her to a secretive international influence arm of the Chinese Government.
> Apart from that nearly 45% of her electorate are overseas born with 20% having a Chinese background.  So if you are claiming "identity politics" in respect of Liu, what does it entail?




Once again I'm not going to respond to insults, so take your opinions on racism (which I doubt you know the meaning of the word)  and shove them.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 October 2019)

rederob said:


> As to the "fuss" about Lui, it was mostly about alleged breaches of the Electoral Act until the ABC also uncovered ties linking her to a secretive international influence arm of the Chinese Government.




And you see nothing wrong with Glady's links to Chinese communist government ?

Cheeses.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 October 2019)

rederob said:


> Apart from that nearly 45% of her electorate are overseas born with 20% having a Chinese background. So if you are claiming "identity politics" in respect of Liu, what does it entail?




80% of the electorate doesn't have a Chinese background.


----------



## rederob (13 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Once again I'm not going to respond to insults you little turd, so take your opinions on racism (which I doubt you know the meaning of the word)  and shove them.



You are not capable of substantiating your claims are you!
You claim "identity politics" and don't understand it.
You are asked to provide an example and cannot.
Then you repeating the Box Hill flag raising event without realising the Police actions were entirely appropriate.
You are the epitome of racist dog whistlers with a slew of comments specifying race and hoping others join your imagined dots.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 October 2019)

rederob said:


> Then you repeating the Box Hill flag raising event without realising the Police actions were entirely appropriate.




Why were they appropriate ? (BTW that was the example you asked for in case you missed it).

The flag raising was celebrating 70 years of the Chinese *Communist* Party, rolling out the tanks and missiles to intimidate everyone around the world.

What a great achievement, keeping 1.4 billion people in slavery to one of the worst governments in the world.

You want to celebrate that comrade then maybe change your name to Red Rob. 

Just in case you think I have something against the Chinese race I celebrate the achievements of Taiwan ( a democratic country) which is the 22nd richest country in the world but has been dumped by countries like ours in favour of the big dollars from the Red Chinese.


----------



## rederob (13 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> No flag of another country should be flown from any building in Australia, unless there is an official visit of some sort.





SirRumpole said:


> There are people trying to slice the country into little pieces and make us all fight each other.





SirRumpole said:


> We keep hearing about "the Muslim community" or the "Chinese community" or the "gay and lesbian community" etc as if each group have their own special needs that governments and the rest of society should pander to.
> That's identity politics and it's rubbish.





SirRumpole said:


> However anyone flying the flag of another country on their proerty has to raise questions of "whose side are they on ?".





SirRumpole said:


> Once you treat certain groups differently, it only provokes the rest to say "what about us".





SirRumpole said:


> 80% of the electorate doesn't have a Chinese background.



So there's a selection of your comments.
It's a lot of mud throwing without a shred of qualification or substantiation.


----------



## rederob (13 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Why were they appropriate ? (BTW that was the example you asked for in case you missed it).
> The flag raising was celebrating 70 years of the Chinese *Communist* Party, rolling out the tanks and missiles to intimidate everyone around the world.
> What a great achievement, keeping 1.4 billion people in slavery to one of the worst governments in the world.



That pretty well says it all, so I will leave you on your merry rants.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 October 2019)

rederob said:


> That pretty well says it all, so I will leave you on your merry rants.




Hahaha. I give you specifics and you have no reply.

You are a waste of space with empty arguments.


----------



## cynic (13 October 2019)

Value Collector said:


> How can you tell if some one is Chinese or Australian just by walking past them in the street???



Tien tau!!!


----------



## Value Collector (13 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Does he ever fly the Australian flag, as he happens to live here ?




Not that I have seen, but just because you move across the world, doesn’t mean you won’t want to still celebrate some of your culture from the previous home.

Heck, we have the Union Jack on our flag still hahahaha.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 October 2019)

Value Collector said:


> Heck, we have the Union Jack on our flag still hahahaha.




Yes unfortunately. 

A boomerang on a blue background with the southern cross would be better I reckon.

Every time we win an olympic medal the poms take half the credit.


----------



## qldfrog (13 October 2019)

I would not fly the french fren here at home, but that is up to the individual, i am opposed to flying any foreign flag on a public building except of course for a delegation visit or an 8nternational event world convention, sport etc


----------



## rederob (13 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Hahaha. I give you specifics and you have no reply.
> You are a waste of space with empty arguments.



And you simply have no idea that there are actual protocols for raising foreign flags, and that they were followed - with an answer previously offered:


rederob said:


> There are protocols for flying foreign flags and they were followed to the letter.



Your sole example was a demonstration of your ignorance.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 October 2019)

rederob said:


> And you simply have no idea that there are actual protocols for raising foreign flags, and that they were followed - with an answer previously offered:




Well then, let's fly the Russian flag on Lenin's birthday.


----------



## Value Collector (14 October 2019)

qldfrog said:


> I would not fly the french fren here at home, but that is up to the individual, i am opposed to flying any foreign flag on a public building except of course for a delegation visit or an 8nternational event world convention, sport etc





qldfrog said:


> You can or not care about my input but after working in China for 2 years, i  think in the above you are making a fundamental mistake
> While Australian from Chinese background can genuinely act feel and truly believe they are Australian, this is NOT how China see it.
> For China, they are overseas Chinese, and they will stay so even after generations.
> Han forever.
> ...




"China" can see it how ever they want, but that each person is an individual, not some automaton controlled by the government of their former home land. 

Anytime you try and make broad statements about how a individuals think because of their race or nationality you are probably making a mistake.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 October 2019)

Value Collector said:


> "China" can see it how ever they want, but that each person is an individual, not some automaton controlled by the government of their former home land.




China can exercise control over their former citizens by leaning on their families still in China.

It's a bit hard to criticise the homeland if your granny get thrown in gaol if you say something wrong.


----------



## basilio (17 October 2019)

Interesting court case in the US.   
After the book was released the father of one of children killed was accused of being a liar received death threats.
The guy who wrote the book is still firmly convinced no one was killed and it was all a fake event.

*Sandy Hook father awarded $450,000 after suing conspiracy theorist*
Father of boy killed in Newtown school shooting sued James Fetzer and Mike Palacek over their book Nobody Died at Sandy Hook

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...warded-450000-after-suing-conspiracy-theorist


----------



## Tink (17 October 2019)




----------



## SirRumpole (17 October 2019)

basilio said:


> Interesting court case in the US.
> After the book was released the father of one of children killed was accused of being a liar received death threats.
> The guy who wrote the book is still firmly convinced no one was killed and it was all a fake event.
> 
> ...




Good to see some of these fake news merchants held to account.

How sick would you be to write that rubbish ?


----------



## Smurf1976 (17 October 2019)

I’ll simply say that there’s a big difference between someone who in the late 1930’s had said “Hitler and thus the German government are extremely dangerous to humanity” or something of that nature versus someone saying “I hate all Germans”.

The latter is clearly racist but the former is simply an observation of the actions of someone in a position of power.

Of relevance to recent comments, making derogatory comments about all Chinese, Russian, Australian or American people would be racist but simply criticising a country’s government or its policies most certainly isn’t.


----------



## wayneL (17 October 2019)

'cept nationalities aren't necessarily racial groups. The context would have to make it clear that an ethnic/racial group is being referred to.


----------



## Smurf1976 (17 October 2019)

wayneL said:


> 'cept nationalities aren't necessarily racial groups. The context would have to make it clear that an ethnic/racial group is being referred to.



True but practical usage often overlooks that distinction on all sides.

Eg those who express a dislike of Americans aren’t strictly being racist but it’s a similar concept of expressing hate based on where someone was born or currently lives.

The distinction between the people and their government remains regardless of the details.


----------



## wayneL (17 October 2019)

Smurf1976 said:


> True but practical usage often overlooks that distinction on all sides.
> 
> Eg those who express a dislike of Americans aren’t strictly being racist but it’s a similar concept of expressing hate based on where someone was born or currently lives.
> 
> The distinction between the people and their government remains regardless of the details.



I'm of the opinion which she was of racism for absolutely genuine incidences of such. Otherwise it just diminishes the meaning of the word. And to be honest that is exactly what is happening, being called a racist means absolutely nothing anymore.

It's almost to the stage where it just means you are not part of the extreme woke left.... Which is a positive.

That means we are left with nothing for the ttue racists.


----------



## Smurf1976 (17 October 2019)

wayneL said:


> I'm of the opinion which she was of racism for absolutely genuine incidences of such. Otherwise it just diminishes the meaning of the word. And to be honest that is exactly what is happening, being called a racist means absolutely nothing anymore.
> 
> It's almost to the stage where it just means you are not part of the extreme woke left.... Which is a positive.



I do agree with your point there. 

My point though is that regardless of the choice of words, it is not racist by any reasonable definition to disagree with the actions of a government.

If someone expresses strongly negative views of the Australian, Chinese, French, US or whatever government then that's an expression of dislike of the government and/or its policies or actions, it's not a direct expression of dislike of the people born or living in that country. Criticising the policies or action of a government is not of itself racist. 

In practical use I'll suggest that most who say they don't like China or the US are referring to the government and are not not the people and as such are not being racist.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 October 2019)

Smurf1976 said:


> In practical use I'll suggest that most who say they don't like China or the US are referring to the government and are not not the people and as such are not being racist.




Indeed so. A democratic non military mainland China would be a great thing for the world considering the resources they could offer to the solving of common problems, however there is no onus on us to support their military advances or their cyber attacks or interfering in our society and our institutions.

The same logical fallacy is exhibited towards the discussion on religion which I won't go into here except to say that if you criticise some aspect of a religion's teaching then you are a racist or a bigot. It's an easy diversion to throw out in order to avoid an intellectual discussion of their theology which they can't support with evidence.


----------



## rederob (17 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> The same logical fallacy is exhibited towards the discussion on religion which I won't go into here....



Where was the logical fallacy?


SirRumpole said:


> ... if you criticise some aspect of a religion's teaching then you are a racist or a bigot.



You may well be a bigot, but could not be a racist.


SirRumpole said:


> It's an easy diversion to throw out in order to avoid an intellectual discussion....



Bigotry is not a diversion!







SirRumpole said:


> ... an intellectual discussion of their theology which they can't support with evidence.



Given that the only evidence of religions is that there *are *religions, because there is a palpable shortage of the many gods being invoked.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 October 2019)

rederob said:


> You may well be a bigot, but could not be a racist.




Ah ok, if I question the pretext that God created the Universe in 7 days, I would be a bigot would I ?


----------



## SirRumpole (17 October 2019)

rederob said:


> Where was the logical fallacy?




The logical fallacy was that if you question the policy of a government you automatically hate all the people in that country.


----------



## rederob (17 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Ah ok, if I question the pretext that God created the Universe in 7 days, I would be a bigot would I ?



It seems a good question so how could it be intolerant?


----------



## rederob (17 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> The logical fallacy was that if you question the policy of a government you automatically hate all the people in that country.



That's an assumption as distinct from a fallacy.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 October 2019)

rederob said:


> It seems a good question so how could it be intolerant?




Some might argue that disbelief of anything in the Bible is intolerant.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 October 2019)

rederob said:


> That's an assumption as distinct from a fallacy.




It's a fallacious assumption.


----------



## rederob (17 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Some might argue that disbelief of anything in the Bible is intolerant.



That's just an "argument."
Are they actually showing intolerance?


SirRumpole said:


> It's a fallacious assumption



Perhaps, but not a logical fallacy.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 October 2019)

rederob said:


> That's just an "argument."
> Are they actually showing intolerance?




Ask Richard Dawkins.



Anyway I have no desire to enter into a religious debate, I don't care much for theology and while I respect the right of people to peacefully practise their religion I oppose religious institutions exerting power over individuals.


----------



## rederob (17 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Ask Richard Dawkins.
> Anyway I have no desire to enter into a religious debate, I don't care much for theology and while I respect the right of people to peacefully practise their religion I oppose religious institutions exerting power over individuals.



It's a debate about what it means to be a bigot, rather than being about "beliefs."


----------



## SirRumpole (17 October 2019)

rederob said:


> It's a debate about what it means to be a bigot, rather than being about "beliefs."




Does it really matter ?

Do you think intolerance to fairy tales presented as truth is bigotry ?

And even if it is, "bigotry" is just a word, but it's a pejorative used to deflect meaningful debate about the evidence for beliefs because the people who call others bigots have no evidence to back up their claims.


----------



## rederob (17 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> And even if it is, "bigotry" is just a word, but it's a pejorative used to deflect meaningful debate about the evidence for beliefs because the people who call others bigots have no evidence to back up their claims.



That's a complete nonsense.
Do you actually understand the concept of "tolerance?"
You need to go and study some epistemology and come to grips with how *knowledge *and *belief *are treated as distinct domains.


----------



## wayneL (17 October 2019)

rederob said:


> That's a complete nonsense.
> Do you actually understand the concept of "tolerance?"
> You need to go and study some epistemology and come to grips with how *knowledge *and *belief *are treated as distinct domains.



Hmm, that may be so.

But to choose something topical, if I were to poo-hoo the concept of 100 genders, is that from a point of *knowledge*, or *belief?*


----------



## SirRumpole (17 October 2019)

rederob said:


> That's a complete nonsense.
> Do you actually understand the concept of "tolerance?"
> You need to go and study some epistemology and come to grips with how *knowledge *and *belief *are treated as distinct domains.




Yeah right rob, I'm afraid my tolerance to your hair splitting has now expired.

This is a meaningless argument. I have no idea what you are trying to prove.

People can believe anything they want as far as I care but unless they can back it up with some solid evidence I have a right to remain intolerant to them and tell them to go away and not bother me with their unfounded beliefs.


----------



## rederob (17 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> People can believe anything they want as far as I care but unless they can back it up with some solid evidence I have a right to remain intolerant to them and tell them to go away and not bother me with their unfounded beliefs.



Little wonder you say strange things as you have real difficulties with what words means in the context they are used.
As I said, go and read up on epistemology as you are confusing concepts.
Religion is about "faith" which is a conviction personally held and requires no evidence.


----------



## rederob (17 October 2019)

wayneL said:


> Hmm, that may be so.
> 
> But to choose something topical, if I were to poo-hoo the concept of 100 genders, is that from a point of *knowledge*, or *belief?*



Probably sheer ignorance.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 October 2019)

rederob said:


> Little wonder you say strange things as you have real difficulties with what words means in the context they are used.
> As I said, go and read up on epistemology as you are confusing concepts.
> Religion is about "faith" which is a conviction personally held and requires no evidence.




That's fine, but when religious people start preaching in the street and wonder why no one listens they never think it's because of a lack of evidence.


----------



## Smurf1976 (17 October 2019)

rederob said:


> Religion is about "faith" which is a conviction personally held and requires no evidence.



Agreed.

An issue of relevance though is that almost certainly rather a lot of those who voice their opinion on all sorts of matters are doing it in a religious manner in practice. That is, they have a conviction that the issue is real and serious but have personally seen no evidence that this is so.

That's not to say they are wrong as such but there does seem to be a lot of "jump on the bandwagon" sort of stuff going on without real knowledge on the part of those involved.

Exceptions of course as with anything.


----------



## Smurf1976 (18 October 2019)

rederob said:


> Do you actually understand the concept of "tolerance?"



The problem is that concepts such as tolerance, bigotry, freedom of speech and others are often things which are "subject to you agreeing with me".

It's dead easy to find people who will say they are absolutely tolerant, they support freedom of speech and they most certainly are not a bigot.

Then watch what happens when they discover that what you're going to say is the exact opposite of their own personal views on whatever subject.

Some will grit their teeth and hand you the microphone or whatever but reality is many don't actually support freedom of speech or tolerance at all. What they support is your right to agree with them.


----------



## rederob (18 October 2019)

Smurf1976 said:


> Agreed.
> An issue of relevance though is that almost certainly rather a lot of those who voice their opinion on all sorts of matters are doing it in a religious manner in practice. That is, they have a conviction that the issue is real and serious but have personally seen no evidence that this is so.
> That's not to say they are wrong as such but there does seem to be a lot of "jump on the bandwagon" sort of stuff going on without real knowledge on the part of those involved.
> Exceptions of course as with anything.



*Opinions *are not equal.
Some people learn a lot to offer their opinion, like doctors or lawyers, and get paid for it.  It doesn’t mean they are right, but it is a well-informed opinion and differs from a guess assumed from an imaginary god's commandments.


Smurf1976 said:


> The problem is that concepts such as tolerance, bigotry, freedom of speech and others are often things which are "subject to you agreeing with me".
> It's dead easy to find people who will say they are absolutely tolerant, they support freedom of speech and they most certainly are not a bigot.
> Then watch what happens when they discover that what you're going to say is the exact opposite of their own personal views on whatever subject.
> Some will grit their teeth and hand you the microphone or whatever but reality is many don't actually support freedom of speech or tolerance at all. What they support is your right to agree with them.



While concepts are nuanced, words and actions over time draw their boundary lines.
In some cases specific laws are enacted so that these boundaries are not infringed without penalty.
However the idea of "not agreeing" is of itself not what is at issue.  Instead we look at how that is *expressed, *and consider the *context *(which in these cases could be likened to *intent*).  Your example may involve aspects of the concepts but are more akin to *hypocrisy*.


----------



## qldfrog (18 October 2019)

What you call facts i can call opinion.
No better example than the co2 hysteria on global warming: our latest religion, but same on islam or veganism
There are facts
And there is presentations of facts
A Muslim decapitates 3 people in the street with a kitchen knife
One fact (that you can choose or not to reveal)
Then 2 opinions
-He has mental history
Or
-He is applying his religion to the letter

Not that easy clear cut
And being a Mullah or a NZ PM does not qualify you better to decide

My 2c only


----------



## rederob (18 October 2019)

qldfrog said:


> What you call facts i can call opinion.
> No better example than the co2 hysteria on global warming: our latest religion, but same on islam or veganism
> There are facts
> And there is presentations of facts
> ...



*Facts *speak for themselves, whereas *your opinions* may be baseless or ill founded.
CO2 hysteria is an "opinion" however the role of CO2 in climate science is based on principles of physics.
WRT to your decapitation example, if the evidence shows a history of mental issues then it ceases to be an "opinion" and if the event was premeditated with clear evidence of rationale then that too ceases to be "opinion".


----------



## basilio (18 October 2019)

The people who rebel these days - and why they are rebelling.


----------



## qldfrog (18 October 2019)

They believed too,
https://images.app.goo.gl/T2YPbZKq1qcbhNLb7
There was a perfectly acknowledged at the time sciences on racially based IQ and potential
You just had to believe
They only lacked objectivity and common sense: 80 y later, lesson not learnt and fanatism unleashed


----------



## qldfrog (18 October 2019)

I could have used red guards or soviet marches but it seemed some people still believe these were the rightful and still want socialism so not good to make a point


----------



## cynic (18 October 2019)

Contrary to a certain zealously expressed opinion, from the resident religious zealot, facts either are, or are not! They do not speak for themselves(unless they are opinionated!)


----------



## qldfrog (18 October 2019)

rederob said:


> *Facts *speak for themselves, whereas *your opinions* may be baseless or ill founded.
> CO2 hysteria is an "opinion" however the role of CO2 in climate science is based on principles of physics.
> WRT to your decapitation example, if the evidence shows a history of mental issues then it ceases to be an "opinion" and if the event was premeditated with clear evidence of rationale then that too ceases to be "opinion".



I bypass the CO2 science as indeed there are greenhouse gases co2  ch4 
or water
Let's drink wine to combat GW
And i am not going to repeat again that earth must have been a living superheated hell when co2 were 10 times aka 1000% higher..imagine..

But what do you define as mental illness?
Someone bashing his head on the floor 5 times a day to the point of having forehead scars?
Normal?
I have my opinion and probably differ from yours
Normality is very subjective
Anyway on the matter of extinction rebellion, it is a warm feeling each time i see one of these ignorant glued to a road
Can not do better to completely discredit whatever message they want to give usually a mix of lgbt rights socialism and pseudo environmental garbage while they accept welfare straight from our iron and coal mines, and debt inflicted on our next generation.
They had a blockade planned yesterday at 7am in brisbane
3 protesters attended
7am ..far too early for these dedicated champion of the planet
I am out now


----------



## rederob (18 October 2019)

cynic said:


> Contrary to a certain zealously expressed opinion, from the resident religious zealot, facts either are, or are not! They do not speak for themselves(unless they are opinionated!)



Facts are things proven to be true.  
Cats are or are not, so we don't play with trivialities.


----------



## rederob (18 October 2019)

qldfrog said:


> I bypass the CO2 science as indeed there are greenhouse gases co2  ch4
> or water
> Let's drink wine to combat GW
> And i am not going to repeat again that earth must have been a living superheated hell when co2 were 10 times aka 1000% higher..imagine..



We are aware of your ignorance of climate science, but how do your ideas about 1000% CO2 fit into what is presently happening given no humans were on the planet back then?


----------



## wayneL (18 October 2019)

rederob said:


> We are aware of your ignorance of climate science, but how do your ideas about 1000% CO2 fit into what is presently happening given no humans were on the planet back then?



I have no idea of your qualifications Mr Red, but would  posit that you are not in fact a climate scientist.

While cognizant that there are many alarmist scientists of various disciplines who dovetail rather nicely into your non scientific opinion, you clearly there are many other scientists of various disciplines related to climate study who are at odds with both yourself and alarmist scientists.

You clearly have a *belief* that your opinion is irrevocable, but equally clearly you areaexhibiting a humongous confirmation bias that is in no way scientific.

Additionally your penchant for immediately resorting to ad hominem argumentative fallacy shows that your opinion is rather more political and scientific.

I'm not a clinate scientist either, but I have been a consumer of various disciplines of science for quite a few decades now and I know how to read science.

Therefore your continuous claim that all are ignorant of climate science apart from you and basilio is shown to be utterly ludicrous.

That's my last word on the subject until such time as I decided to have more words on the subject, but in this arena discussion is nothing really more than a pxssing contest.

For now I am off to participate in more interesting and productive discussions.


----------



## rederob (18 October 2019)

wayneL said:


> I have no idea of your qualifications Mr Red, but would  posit that you are not in fact a climate scientist.
> 
> While cognizant that there are many alarmist scientists of various disciplines who dovetail rather nicely into your non scientific opinion, you clearly there are many other scientists of various disciplines related to climate study who are at odds with both yourself and alarmist scientists.
> 
> ...



You have shown that without facts, all you are left with is *opinion, *and even then it was not enough so you ventured into dubious assumptions.


----------



## cynic (18 October 2019)

rederob said:


> You have shown that without facts, all you are left with is *opinion, *and even then it was not enough so you ventured into dubious assumptions.



That is merely your opinion! The only facts I can espy, are the facts of the existence of opinions!!

There are opinions of what defines a fact, and there is the fact of those opinions (of that which defines a fact)!!!  I challenge you to show me a fact, that is fact in, and, of itself, rather than merely someone's opinion of said fact!


----------



## rederob (18 October 2019)

cynic said:


> That is merely your opinion! The only facts I can espy, are the facts of the existence of opinions!!
> 
> There are opinions of what defines a fact, and there is the fact of those opinions (of that which defines a fact)!!!  I challenge you to show me a fact, that is fact in, and, of itself, rather than merely someone's opinion of said fact!



Temperature, velocity, mass, distance, sound, material objects, and those many other things which are self evident.
The other point you make is about what it means to have a language which allows us to distinguish things.
That you have expressed an opinion is a fact.  It's a neat paradox that counters your ideas.


----------



## cynic (18 October 2019)

rederob said:


> Temperature, velocity, mass, distance, sound, material objects, and those many other things which are self evident.
> The other point you make is about what it means to have a language which allows us to distinguish things.
> That you have expressed an opinion is a fact.  It's a neat paradox that counters your ideas.



Yes! I have expressed an opinion! That seems to be the only fact, of which anyone can be reasonably certain.
All else, including our opinion of our sensory impressions of our purportedly tangible reality, is in fact, only our opinion of that which we have perceived!


----------



## SirRumpole (18 October 2019)

rederob said:


> Temperature, velocity, mass, distance, sound, material objects, and those many other things which are self evident.
> The other point you make is about what it means to have a language which allows us to distinguish things.
> That you have expressed an opinion is a fact.  It's a neat paradox that counters your ideas.




What's the epistemology of opinion vs belief robbie ?


----------



## rederob (18 October 2019)

cynic said:


> Yes! I have expressed an opinion! That seems to be the only fact, of which anyone can be reasonably certain.
> All else, including our opinion of our sensory impressions of our purportedly tangible reality, is in fact, only our opinion of that which we have perceived!



Have a long think about what you said, and tell me if you consider it actually makes sense.
I will be back to it tomorrow and comment if you have not in the interim.


----------



## rederob (18 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> What's the epistemology of opinion vs belief robbie ?



That question is nonsensical, so can you please rephrase it.


----------



## cynic (18 October 2019)

rederob said:


> Have a long think about what you said, and tell me if you consider it actually makes sense.
> I will be back to it tomorrow and comment if you have not in the interim.



I am more than happy for you to comment now.

My opinion is that you, will be expressing your considered opinion (usually one of contempt for opposing views), on the content and/or issuer of same.

But hey, that's just my opinion!

Prove me wrong!!


----------



## rederob (18 October 2019)

cynic said:


> I am more than happy for you to comment now.
> My opinion is that you, will be expressing your considered opinion (usually one of contempt for opposing views), on the content and/or issuer of same.
> But hey, that's just my opinion!
> Prove me wrong!!





cynic said:


> All else, including our opinion of our sensory impressions of our purportedly tangible reality, is in fact, only our opinion of that which we have perceived!



You either know you have an experience of x, or you do not have an experience of x.
If you only have an "opinion" then reality to you is meaningless.
Moreover, you cannot presume to call the expression of your opinion as a *fact* because it becomes contradictory.


----------



## cynic (18 October 2019)

rederob said:


> You either know you have an experience of x, or you do not have an experience of x.
> If you only have an "opinion" then reality to you is meaningless.
> Moreover, you cannot presume to call the expression of your opinion as a *fact* because it becomes contradictory.



Do opinions exist ?


----------



## SirRumpole (18 October 2019)

cynic said:


> Do opinions exist ?




Yes, but that's only my opinion.


----------



## rederob (18 October 2019)

cynic said:


> Do opinions exist ?



In your fabricated world that is not a meaningful sense.


----------



## sptrawler (18 October 2019)

And here is one to highlight people, who don't have a mirror in the house.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...list-morrison-government-20191015-p530yt.html

From the article:
_Activist group GetUp will escalate its fight with Prime Minister Scott Morrison by accusing him of being an "authoritarian populist" who tries to shut down his critics.

Mr Morrison as a copy of populist leaders overseas who cannot take criticism, citing the Prime Minister's speech in August when he blamed the activist group for "bullying" opponents.

Democracy everywhere is under attack from right-wing populists who divide their countries into ‘us versus them' and then try to silence their opponents.

They're undermining traditional institutions, weakening the rule of law and destroying democratic norms.

"Facts get twisted and things get made up because the only goal is power."_.

Well that nearly made me wet myself, when you think back to the bullying of Margret Court, Israel Folau, the current disruption in the streets, by a vocal minority who also have a fanatical belief that "their way, is the only way".
It is a shame these fanatical minorities, don't apply the same guidelines to their own behaviour, that they expect and even demand of others.


----------



## cynic (18 October 2019)

rederob said:


> In your fabricated world that is not a meaningful sense.



Please clarify!

Is that a yes (i.e. opinions do exist), or a no (i.e. opinions do not exist)?


----------



## Smurf1976 (18 October 2019)

sptrawler said:


> Well that nearly made me wet myself, when you think back to the bullying of Margret Court, Israel Folau, the current disruption in the streets, by a vocal minority who also have a fanatical belief that "their way, is the only way".
> It is a shame these fanatical minorities, don't apply the same guidelines to their own behaviour, that they expect and even demand of others.




I have strong disagreement with the views expressed by Folau but so far as I'm concerned he's fully entitled to express them without suffering undue consequences from doing so.

Comparing him to climate change activists, both have done essentially the same thing:

*Neither claim to be subject matter experts. That is, the are acting on a belief that what some higher source has told them is accurate.

*Both claim that the vast majority of the population have sinned in some way.

*Both claim that there will be serious consequences from continuing with this.

*A layperson is unable to verify the accuracy of their claims in both cases. To the extent that ordinary people have an understanding of religion or climate change, what they have is a belief that what someone else has told them is true or not true. Ordinary people are unable to verify the accuracy of the claims being made.

*Both bring similar consequences of potentially causing mental stress among those who believe the claims made to be true.

Same with most issues. Rarely is any preacher an actual expert on the subject. Rather, most are simply acting on a belief that what someone else has told them is true. Ask them some serious questions about the issue and you'll very quickly discover that they lack real knowledge - they're selling a message but they're not a real expert on the subject.

So far as free speech is concerned, whether or not you agree with what someone wishes to say is a very different concept to whether or not you agree that they ought to be able to say it. Personally well I don't agree with religion just as I don't like pretty much any electronic music and I don't generally agree with advertising. I wouldn't seek to prevent them however unless there's overwhelming evidence of actual harm.


----------



## rederob (18 October 2019)

cynic said:


> Please clarify!
> Is that a yes (i.e. opinions do exist), or a no (i.e. opinions do not exist)?



The reply was complete.
What is there to clarify?


----------



## cynic (18 October 2019)

rederob said:


> The reply was complete.
> What is there to clarify?



How about a straight answer , to a straightforward question, for which a simple "yes" or "no" should suffice :


cynic said:


> Do opinions exist ?


----------



## rederob (18 October 2019)

cynic said:


> How about a straight answer , to a straightforward question, for which a simple "yes" or "no" should suffice :



The answer was complete as it it satisfied the nature of the world you perceive.


----------



## cynic (18 October 2019)

rederob said:


> The answer was complete as it it satisfied the nature of the world you perceive.



You still have not answered:


cynic said:


> Do opinions exist ?


----------



## sptrawler (18 October 2019)

It is really strange that only the bullies, have the right to call everyone else a bully, who doesn't agree with them.

It appears to me that every cause is trying to take on board the religious prophecy,  "the meek shall inherit the World" and they will bully, bash and browbeat everyone, that stands in the way of their inheritance.


----------



## Smurf1976 (18 October 2019)

rederob said:


> *Opinions *are not equal.



Agreed.

A related issue however is the public's apparent loss of confidence in certain groups.

Business is one such example. Asbestos, tobacco, various drugs, all sorts of pesticides and so on. All "won't hurt you" until it turned out that actually they're a rather big problem yes.

Anyone associated with the economics profession, including by default all politicians, is another. All that "microeconomic reform" as it was called. De-regulate and sell off anything and everything. Some of the earlier ones seemed to work, eg aviation, but then there's private health insurance, electricity, gas, communications networks, toll roads and so on all of which have ended up becoming rather costly to ordinary consumers and business alike. Don't even mention banking. Most ordinary people can see that it hasn't simply cost them a few $ but has pretty much stuffed the competitiveness of the entire economy.

Churches let's not go there. One word says enough.

Then there's unions selling out workers either directly or by endorsing unfavourable political candidates or policies because they just happen to originate from the ALP.

Universities were once held in very high regard as were their academics. The knowledge is still there but that respect is now tainted by the pursuit of profit.

So part of the problem is that experts and others once held in high regard are substantially discredited these days. No longer does the public trust that someone who's an expert in whatever is going to tell them the truth on that subject. It's not 1979 anymore when an ordinary person could rely on a bank manager giving them sound advice, utilities actively steered consumers toward the cheapest option by default and state governments were willing to fight their own party at the federal level in an effort to advantage their own state.

Now it's far more "everyone for themselves" hence the lack of trust in anyone professing to be an expert.


----------



## sptrawler (19 October 2019)

You pretty well nailed it there smurf.

Credibility as we once knew it has been lost, now there is the rise of those who are articulate and suffer from verbosity, they can defend the indefensible by arguing the intricacies at the cost of common sense.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 October 2019)

cynic said:


> You still have not answered:




I wouldn't worry about rob, he never answers a straight question he just insults people.

Opinions are a expression of belief, I think that just about covers it.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 October 2019)

Smurf1976 said:


> Now it's far more "everyone for themselves" hence the lack of trust in anyone professing to be an expert.




It's hard to see what our Chief Scientist had going for himself when he presented his report on the energy sector, but there are people who would ascribe underhand motives to what he said.

That says more about them than him I'd suggest and lining them all up for a Q&A would soon embarrass the criticisers, but again that Q&A itself would be seen by some as a political exercise.

A no win situation.


----------



## rederob (19 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> I wouldn't worry about rob, he never answers a straight question he just insults people.
> Opinions are a expression of belief, I think that just about covers it.



You simply do not like the answers so consider them insults, as I can assure you I do answer straight questions.
@cynic does not consider there are things commonly known as "facts" and merely considers them "opinions" based on perception.  In such a word of his making he has excluded the possibility of "realities," things which are tangible and therefore are normally considered to exist.  Such a stance is dichotomous: there is either reality or there is not.  
The problem with @cynic's ideas about opinion of perception is its essential contradiction.  The moment I answered his question all readers experienced the reality of seeing a reply on whatever device they use to view this thread.  The reply became a "fact."  So carefully read what @cynic has posted on this point and you will see he disputes this version of our nature.


----------



## rederob (19 October 2019)

Smurf1976 said:


> I have strong disagreement with the views expressed by Folau but so far as I'm concerned he's fully entitled to express them without suffering undue consequences from doing so.
> 
> Comparing him to climate change activists, both have done essentially the same thing:
> 
> ...



This is a serious case of false equivalence.
The "bridge" that crosses a river is different to the "bridge" that close a gap in a negotiation.
As is the *belief *which is commonly held without evidence - such as in gods - compared with the *belief *we have in things which are evident, which we can call *justified true belief *to ensure the distinction.
Although it does not mean some of your points are not valid, it does mean that your argument is unsound.
Examples:


Smurf1976 said:


> *Neither claim to be subject matter experts. That is, the are acting on a belief that what some higher source has told them is accurate.



If you accept that we know things, such as the bottom of the ocean has volcanoes, the speed of light can be calculated, and that the right type of matter as big as your fist can destroy a city, then you have a basis for justified true belief.  Put another way, if you did not know, there would be  way to show you it was true.
We do not need to be subject experts to "know" things because we have a reasoned basis for trusting people that are trained to tell us the truth about what they learn.  


Smurf1976 said:


> *Both claim that the vast majority of the population have sinned in some way.



I am not aware of this argument.
Climate change is about attribution, and now that we know its principal cause we should act to mitigate it.  Industrialisation has been the main contributor to GHGs and this occurred in nations with relatively small populations for several centuries before China began to industrialise.


Smurf1976 said:


> *Both claim that there will be serious consequences from continuing with this.



Those of us who are "old" will know from actual experience that weather patterns have changed considerably.  The Australian perspective of more bush fires of greater intensity occurring earlier and persisting for longer is tangible. Farmers who for decades relied on reliable irrigation waters are moving off the land.


Smurf1976 said:


> *A layperson is unable to verify the accuracy of their claims in both cases. To the extent that ordinary people have an understanding of religion or climate change, what they have is a belief that what someone else has told them is true or not true. Ordinary people are unable to verify the accuracy of the claims being made.



To make this claim you have to prove that historical climate records are completely unreliable or fraudulent, and are hidden to us.  You would have to show that equations for energy balance models were wrong, and that it was not possible to measure incoming and outgoing (energy) radiation.  You would have to show that the lay person could not be educated to understand climate basics.
More importantly, you would need to show that we have no basis for letting science inform us about what we come to know. If climate science is made out by many to be a religion, it is at least one which is tangible in terms of copious evidence.


----------



## wayneL (19 October 2019)

And it looks like Robee has appointed himself final arbiter of all that is reality.


----------



## rederob (19 October 2019)

wayneL said:


> And it looks like Robee has appointed himself final arbiter of all that is reality.



Please reflect on your post as a perfect example of *argumentum ad hominem.*


----------



## cynic (19 October 2019)

rederob said:


> You simply do not like the answers so consider them insults, as I can assure you I do answer straight questions.



Says the man repeatedly refusing to answer a simple direct question for which a simple "yes","no" (or perhaps even "do not know") would have sufficed!


> @cynic does not consider there are things commonly known as "facts" and merely considers them "opinions" based on perception.  In such a word of his making he has excluded the possibility of "realities," things which are tangible and therefore are normally considered to exist.  Such a stance is dichotomous: there is either reality or there is not.
> The problem with @cynic's ideas about opinion of perception is its essential contradiction.  The moment I answered his question all readers experienced the reality of seeing a reply on whatever device they use to view this thread.  The reply became a "fact."  So carefully read what @cynic has posted on this point and you will see he disputes this version of our nature.



Given that you have chosen not to cooperate with my efforts to alert you to the presence of some important distinctions between facts, and the expressed opinons of same, I consider it inappropriate for you to presume to know what my stance in this matter actually is.

Of course you are entitled to freely express your opinion about what you may think a person's particular stance is...

...and that person is also entitled to freely express their opinion about your opinion of their stance!

I do so now!

Your opinion of my particular stance is seriously amiss!!


----------



## rederob (19 October 2019)

cynic said:


> Given that you have chosen not to cooperate with my efforts to alert you to the presence of some important distinctions between facts, and the expressed opinons of same, I consider it inappropriate for you to presume to know what my stance in this matter actually is.



You position is in print, in this thread so nothing is presumed.
Your world is contradictory: if you consider everything perceived as opinion, then it can have no reality.


----------



## rederob (19 October 2019)

cynic said:


> Yes! I have expressed an opinion! That seems to be the only fact, of which anyone can be reasonably certain.
> *All else, including our opinion of our sensory impressions of our purportedly tangible reality, is in fact, only our opinion of that which we have perceived!*



What I have highlighted above is a contradiction.
If there is a tangible reality, then what you experience cannot be an *opinion*.


----------



## cynic (19 October 2019)

rederob said:


> What I have highlighted above is a contradiction.
> If there is a tangible reality, then what you experience cannot be an *opinion*.



There is a distinction between experience and opinion - and it is one that you seem to have completely neglected here!

Must I now also explain that particular distinction ?!!


----------



## rederob (19 October 2019)

cynic said:


> There is a distinction between experience and opinion - and it is one that you seem to have completely neglected here!
> Must I now also explain that particular distinction ?!!



There is indeed.
However, you have made very clear statements about what you have "*perceived*" which means you have become aware of things through "experience."


----------



## cynic (19 October 2019)

rederob said:


> There is indeed.
> However, you have made very clear statements about what you have "*perceived*" which means you have become aware of things through "experience."



What of it?!

How does that justify your misunderstanding (and subsequent misconstruance) of


cynic said:


> ...
> All else, including our opinion of our sensory impressions of our purportedly tangible reality, is in fact, only our opinion of that which we have perceived!



?!!


----------



## rederob (19 October 2019)

cynic said:


> What of it?!
> How does that justify your misunderstanding (and subsequent misconstruance) of
> ?!!



You posts are available to others, so they can decide on what has been responded to here.
I stay on task, and in this case it is about what constitutes "*reality*."


----------



## cynic (19 October 2019)

rederob said:


> You posts are available to others, so they can decide on what has been responded to here.
> I stay on task, and in this case it is about what constitutes "*reality*."



Great!! 

Let's talk about reality! 

Are opinions real?!!


----------



## wayneL (19 October 2019)

rederob said:


> Please reflect on your post as a perfect example of *argumentum ad hominem.*



Well you made the rules, Champ


----------



## IFocus (19 October 2019)

I admire Red stays on subject and straight directly to the point, one of the few here that actually understands the English language and uses it unsparingly on everyone, intolerant of pretenders (thats everyone else) but engages staying on point. 

I have often learned new things from the interactions keep up gods work Red 

I also miss Bi-polar petty seems to have moved on.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 October 2019)

IFocus said:


> and uses it unsparingly on everyone,* intolerant *of pretenders




You mean he's a bigot ?


----------



## qldfrog (19 October 2019)

I initially thought Red was a paid troll labour ? green? Not sure until i finally found one gold related post from him which had some sense
It is a shock that someone not completely dim can act and post as he is
That is probably where opinion enters in play 
Facts do not matter just his beliefs
So Red carry on, based on freedom of speech but 
Allow me to set Ignore on


----------



## Smurf1976 (19 October 2019)

I’m no lawyer but I’ve seen enough of how courts work as a witness and I’ll make a simple observation.

Everyday language, that is high school level not something requiring a degree, is sufficient to explain any concept in layman’s terms. At most, a very limited number of technical terms may be required but these are themselves explainable in a straightforward manner.

Once discussion turns to the meaning of words and arguing the definition of things, that’s a sure indication that there’s guilt involved.

Nobody who’s genuinely innocent relies on legal technicalities to win the case. Nobody needs to argue the definition of arson versus accident if they didn’t start the fire.

Same concept with pretty much everything.


----------



## rederob (19 October 2019)

qldfrog said:


> That is probably where opinion enters in play
> Facts do not matter just his beliefs
> So Red carry on, based on freedom of speech but
> Allow me to set Ignore on



I usually say if I am offering my "opinion" as I seldom see the need to.
There is an amusing number of posts where people assume things which I would either never say, do or "believe."
Facts do matter to me, and have for as long as I can remember.  So when I see people in this forum and others abusing and distorting information so that justified true belief is a pawn in their game, I try to set the record straight.
In climate threads the sad reality is that science deniers will never be swayed until a climate catastrophe confronts them and causes a rethink.  But climate changes over generational time scales so most people of my vintage are barely going to notice.
The reality that people choose to ignore me gives me great heart.  It means that they are affected by what I say/write.  It also means they are *thinking*.


----------



## Smurf1976 (19 October 2019)

rederob said:


> Examples:
> If you accept that we know things, such as the bottom of the ocean has volcanoes, the speed of light can be calculated, and that the right type of matter as big as your fist can destroy a city, then you have a basis for justified true belief.  Put another way, if you did not know, there would be  way to show you it was true.
> We do not need to be subject experts to "know" things because we have a reasoned basis for trusting people that are trained to tell us the truth about what they learn.



You seem to have completely missed the point that "authority" has lost credibility over time so far as many are concerned.

Here's a current news item: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10...-traces-asbestos-found/11619958?section=world

I've linked the ABC version but for the record News Corp and Fairfax are both running the same story. This a current news item.

So what we have is a long established and supposedly reputable manufacturer of consumer products with asbestos in baby powder. Can't get much worse than that really, a proven and widely known carcinogen in a product specifically marketed for use on babies. 

Now there's few points of relevance to the point I've made:

1. Yet another reminder to consumers that even "reputable" businesses aren't to be trusted. Not the first such incident with the same product after all and the dangers of asbestos are common knowledge.

2. Yet another reminder to consumers that government regulators also are not to be trusted. Took them how many decades to get onto this one?

Now that's just one incident with one consumer product but it's one among many. As the years go by ordinary consumers keep getting these little reminders to not simply take as accurate what those in authority say.

A few decades ago sure, if an expert in whatever said something then people tended to trust that as being true. Doctors and universities were beyond doubt but even big businesses were held in reasonably high regard that they'd provide factually correct information and steer consumers in the right direction.

Those days are long gone and the reality is that the general public is aware that if they can't prove it themselves then caution is warranted. Too many false alarms, too many denials and so on have lead to that.

Get any saucepan, fill it with cold tap water, place it on a hotplate and turn it on. Result is it gets steadily warmer until it boils. This is easily proven at home since practically everyone has access to at least one cooking pot of some sort and a gas, electric or other heat source indeed most people have boiled water on numerous occasions.

Now if I tell you that the internet works then you can prove this yourself with any device connected to it. If I tell you _how_ it works then unless you have technical expertise we are now in the realm of belief. You cannot readily prove to yourself exactly how it works - either you believe the explanation of myself or others or you don't believe it but regardless of what you conclude, it will be a belief for anyone who isn't themselves technically knowledgeable. There are facts available yes, but they are not easily proven by demonstration such that a person's understanding becomes a belief in practice - a belief that someone else correctly understands it and has correctly communicated that information without bias or omission.

Now if we go onto subjects like religion (any of them) or climate change then those things are well and truly beyond the ability of most people to prove or disprove indeed religion is beyond outright proof period. As such, an individual's understanding in relation to these matters is a belief that they are being told the truth by someone else in an environment where absolutely opposing views are commonly aired.

My personal belief on the question of religion is that the entire thing is fictitious. That is however a belief and I cannot prove it one way or the other.

My personal belief on the climate issue is that the problem exists but that humans probably don't understand every detail of it. I say that having read an abundance of work on the subject by others, having looked at weather data sources I know to be accurate and so on. It seems to be correct but I cannot personally prove this and as such my understanding of the issue is a belief. 

Religion and climate are not like the pot on the stove where I can repeatedly demonstrate it with the exact same results thus removing all reasonable doubt. I can't go to heaven, have a look around and verify the whole thing. Can't go to hell and do that either. Also can't actually prove that they don't exist and are works of fiction. Much the same with the climate - I can read a report of someone else's work and _assume_ that the report is factually correct but I can't muck about with the earth's atmosphere and watch the temperature go up and down to prove it.

So we're back to beliefs and authority at a time when authority is increasingly distrusted.


----------



## sptrawler (19 October 2019)

Rob, you probably need to join a probis club, or a debating club, maybe even go back to Uni. Maybe retirement isnt fullfilling enough, but bogging down Joe's forum with pedantics, really doesnt help the forum IMO.
I know you love the cut and thrust of the debate, but it probably isnt what Joe is after, maybe start a debating blog for frustrated ex public servants i.e yes minister, lets talk? Or something like that.
Just my thoughts.


----------



## Smurf1976 (19 October 2019)

rederob said:


> In climate threads the sad reality is that science deniers will never be swayed until a climate catastrophe confronts them and causes a rethink




There is also the commonly overlooked reality that someone can accept the science as apparently correct whilst questioning the issue at the same time.

You won't find the IPCC stating that greenhouse gases are the _only_ cause of climate change for example but it's not hard to find some activist who will argue that as being the case.

You also won't find the IPCC claiming that all details are fully understood but again there many who will claim otherwise.

Someone can accept the basic science as being correct whilst challenging the politics surrounding it. That does not make them a denier of the science.


----------



## Smurf1976 (20 October 2019)

sptrawler said:


> pedantics, really doesnt help the forum IMO



+1000

Agreed and I'll leave it at that.


----------



## rederob (20 October 2019)

Smurf1976 said:


> You seem to have completely missed the point that "authority" has lost credibility over time so far as many are concerned.



Actually I was writing about "knowledge" and how it can be derived from inquiry, so your point is category mistake.


----------



## rederob (20 October 2019)

sptrawler said:


> Rob, you probably need to join a probis club, or a debating club, maybe even go back to Uni. Maybe retirement isnt fullfilling enough, but bogging down Joe's forum with pedantics, really doesnt help the forum IMO.
> I know you love the cut and thrust of the debate, but it probably isnt what Joe is after, maybe start a debating blog for frustrated ex public servants i.e yes minister, lets talk? Or something like that.
> Just my thoughts.



Thanks.
These threads gets lots of visits for reasons which have been well explained, and it's not that I do not post on stock related issues, but I try to find a good reason to when I do given that there are dozens of sources covering more things you can poke a stick at.
I have said before that posting here is a lot more about how we think, and what drives us to think that way.
Yes, people say some batshyt crazy stuff, and as the thread title suggests, they have that right.  
When it does not make sense or is a deliberate distortion, or is an appeal to ignorance, then it deserves challenge.
ASF as a microcosm of the community is very tame in the world of forums, and exceptionally informative by comparison.
WRT to pedantics, it can avoid confusion over what is meant by a word that has various definitions and nuances, and ensure we are not talking at cross purposes.  With respect to avoiding confusions, it is important as, for example, in @Smurf1976's post he was meaning "authority," which is in a separate realm to "knowledge."  Building an argument around category errors is unsound.
It does not mean that some premises are are wrong, but it does mean the argument cannot be relied upon.  
In the case of @cynic, he constructed a contradiction, and this has no meaningful response other than to say it was just that.  Of relevance was that it at least touched on how we define "reality" for ourselves.


----------



## rederob (20 October 2019)

Smurf1976 said:


> There is also the commonly overlooked reality that someone can accept the science as apparently correct whilst questioning the issue at the same time.



What issue?







Smurf1976 said:


> You won't find the IPCC stating that greenhouse gases are the _only_ cause of climate change for example but it's not hard to find some activist who will argue that as being the case.



This is what they said in AR5:
*Anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions have increased since the pre-industrial era, driven largely by economic and population growth, and are now higher than ever. This has led to atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide that are unprecedented in at least the last 800,000 years. Their effects, together with those of other anthropogenic drivers, have been detected throughout the climate system and are extremely likely to have been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.*​So activists are "extremely likely" to be right.


Smurf1976 said:


> You also won't find the IPCC claiming that all details are fully understood but again there many who will claim otherwise.



Really, as I have never heard that one!
This is the obfuscation argument that denialists use and is a very handy tactic.
What *is *fully understood is that to no longer warm the planet there needs to mechanisms that change the energy balance.  The perturbations of the climate system which are not fully understood are a consequence of the imbalance.


Smurf1976 said:


> Someone can accept the basic science as being correct whilst challenging the politics surrounding it.



If we let politicians govern how we think, and what is true, we are headed for catastrophe!


----------



## IFocus (20 October 2019)

sptrawler said:


> Rob, you probably need to join a probis club, or a debating club, maybe even go back to Uni. Maybe retirement isnt fullfilling enough, but bogging down Joe's forum with pedantics, really doesnt help the forum IMO.
> I know you love the cut and thrust of the debate, but it probably isnt what Joe is after, maybe start a debating blog for frustrated ex public servants i.e yes minister, lets talk? Or something like that.
> Just my thoughts.




SP a group standing around nodding there heads in agreement is not a learning environment ever, its a .....gasp ....basket weavers club.

Next thing you maybe demanding is we all stand in and circle hands singing.

Smurf as to the level of acceptance / believing in authority etc I have never seen that to be the case as for asbestos I remember blokes cutting sheets of it using a 9" grinder year after year installing fences, companies and Governments were fully aware of the consequences this was in the 60's/70's I dont think anything has changed in that respect.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 October 2019)

> SP a group standing around nodding there heads in agreement is not a learning environment ever, its a .....gasp ....basket weavers club.
> 
> Next thing you maybe demanding is we all stand in and circle hands singing.
> 
> Smurf as to the level of acceptance / believing in authority etc I have never seen that to be the case as for asbestos I remember blokes cutting sheets of it using a 9" grinder year after year installing fences, companies and Governments were fully aware of the consequences this was in the 60's/70's I dont think anything has changed in that respect.




I think this is really a practical forum, not a philosophy class.

Minutely dissecting the meaning of words in order to try and prove one's intelligence doesn't add anything to solving the problems of the world or making investment decisions. It's tiring and unproductive.

I agree with Smurfs comments about authority losing credibility, because in so many areas 'authorities' are public relations fronts or hired consultants who really have no idea of the practicalities of what they are supposed to be regulating, either that or they are so underfunded that they don't have the resources to do their jobs in the first place.


----------



## moXJO (20 October 2019)

Two sides of a discussion are important. Head nodding stops people learning.


----------



## rederob (20 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Minutely dissecting the meaning of words in order to try and prove one's intelligence doesn't add anything to solving the problems of the world or making investment decisions. It's tiring and unproductive.



This comes from a person who commented on a range of things including "identity politics" without showing that he knew what the words meant.
Words are powerful weapons and misusing them, deliberately or otherwise, has consequences.
The other point is that this is not a competition.
Markets are ruled by emotion and the best counter is clear thinking, unless you work to a rock solid strategy.  So when you see stocks going stratospheric, you have the option of working out the risk by researching why, or jumping on the bandwagon and hoping they knew something you didn't.
Complaining about other's posts, without being constructive is equally unproductive.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 October 2019)

rederob said:


> This comes from a person who commented on a range of things including "identity politics" without showing that he knew what the words meant.




From someone who called me a racist for criticising another country's politics.



Talk about not knowing the meaning of words.


----------



## rederob (20 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> From someone who called me a racist for criticising another country's politics.
> 
> 
> 
> Talk about not knowing the meaning of words.



I linked to your comments, which were unsubstantiated dog whistles.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 October 2019)

rederob said:


> I linked to your comments, which were unsubstantiated dog whistles.




You deny using the term "racist" do you ?


----------



## rederob (20 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> From someone who called me a racist for criticising another country's politics.
> 
> 
> 
> Talk about not knowing the meaning of words.



Not a single comment I linked, and made by *you*, was about *politics*.  
Instead, they smacked of intolerance based largely on what is commonly called *racism*.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 October 2019)

rederob said:


> Then you repeating the Box Hill flag raising event without realising the Police actions were entirely appropriate.
> You are the epitome of racist dog whistlers with a slew of comments specifying race and hoping others join your imagined dots.




Well there you are.

Why were the actions of raising the Chinese flag to celebrate 70 years of communist rule "appropriate" in a free country ?

And why is objecting to this raising "racist" ?

You have some explaining to do I think.


----------



## rederob (20 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Well there you are.
> Why were the actions of raising the Chinese flag to celebrate 70 years of communist rule "appropriate" in a free country ?
> And why is objecting to this raising "racist" ?
> You have some explaining to do I think.



Because you do not understand why is part of the reason I regard your comments as racist.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 October 2019)

rederob said:


> Because you do not understand why is part of the reason I regard your comments as racist.




Non sequitur


----------



## Smurf1976 (20 October 2019)

rederob said:


> Really, as I have never heard that one!
> This is the obfuscation argument that denialists use and is a very handy tactic.



If anyone thought it was fully understood then there would be no point conducting further research into the subject.

Same with anything. There’s no point researching something if you’re confident you already have all the relevant information.

A real scientist would never claim to know all the facts about something as complex as the climate.

At the risk of revealing my real life identity, about 25 years ago I wrote a simple layman’s terms explanation of why droughts occur in south-east Australia. This was all fact checked with the BOM and other credible sources and was published in a News Corp owned newspaper. 

Note that I personally claimed no scientific expertise, only that I was explaining the issue based on accepted wisdom at the time.

About 2008 it became apparent that what everyone thought to be true in relation to drought had missed what’s now thought to be the biggest influence of all, the Indian Ocean. 

As a result of that, what I wrote at the time and what the professional scientific community understood to be true and upon which serious decisions by governments, farmers and water managers were based is now known to have missed the most important point.

No credible scientist would claim certainty that it’s properly understood now either. Better than previously but I’ve no doubt that the WA Water Corporation and Hydro Tasmania would be quick to point out that their real world observations aren’t fully explained by current understanding of climate change or weather so most likely something is still missing in that understanding.

For anything built by humans there’s generally a full understanding of how it works. There’s no doubt as to how a diesel engine works for example but even there, nobody would sensibly claim that all possible improvements have thus far been thought of. 

For a natural system, rarely do humans fully understand it. Humans are still learning about what drives short term weather for example and there’s ongoing research into climate change.

I’ll compare that to the stock market. If someone insists that the price of shares in XYZ is going to double three weeks from now then either they’re an insider with information that isn’t known to most or they’re guessing and don’t really have a clue.

Far more useful analysis cones from those who compile the relevant information and consider plausible scenarios based upon what is known whilst being fully aware that there are uncertainties. They may predict that the price will double but they are fully aware that this is not certain to actually occur.

Back to the climate, real scientists have suggested that changes in albedo may have a disproportionate effect on ice melting and, since the loss of ice of itself brings a further change in albedo, that has a positive feedback.

The IPCC seems to have no issue acknowledging and publishing such research as you’d expect a scientific organisation to do. It’s only those with a political or financial outlook on the subject who insist that humans know all there is to know beyond doubt such that there’s nothing to research.

Same applies to most fields. For example actual solar electricity production in SA today equalled about 70% of all load within the state around 1pm Daylight Savings time.

Go back a decade and not even solar enthusiasts or “green” politicians and activists foresaw that level of output being achieved by now. There are plenty who thought we’d use solar energy but you won’t find anyone, me included, who got the details right.

Same with anything about the future. There’s never absolute certainty.


----------



## Smurf1976 (20 October 2019)

IFocus said:


> Smurf as to the level of acceptance / believing in authority etc I have never seen that to be the case as for asbestos I remember blokes cutting sheets of it using a 9" grinder year after year installing fences, companies and Governments were fully aware of the consequences this was in the 60's/70's I dont think anything has changed in that respect.



The difference is that back in the 1960’s most people trusted that business wouldn’t knowingly put them in danger, governments would always work for the good of the state or country, unions always sought to protect workers, churches were pillars of integrity and so on.

They’ve now seen more than enough evidence to know that isn’t true hence the loss of trust in anyone seen as some sort of authority.

That doesn’t mean it was true 50 years ago but the difference is that people thought it was whereas now they know it isn’t.


----------



## rederob (20 October 2019)

Smurf1976 said:


> If anyone thought it was fully understood then there would be no point conducting further research into the subject.



Except that the issue is about how the planet is warming, and that *IS* understood.
It's the perturbations of the climate system which are not fully understood.
In particular it is about the changing role of clouds or, at least, the possibility that what are now typical cloud patterns could be quite different in future.  This, however, is a feedback process and requires that if there is a substantial change, that it remains that way, else it reverts to the norm.
What is possible to know and what is not as a result of the climate system's chaotic nature can be demonstrated by the simple analogy of putting a grain of rice into a pot of water and bringing it to boil.  To know *exactly *where the grain of rice will be at any point in time while boiling would be an almost impossible task.  What we do know, however, is that when boiled long enough, it will be cooked.
In other words, we don't need to know too much about ENSOs or PDOs, or droughts or floods, because ultimately their effects will be subsumed by the mechanisms that drive actual energy flows into and out of the planet.


----------



## sptrawler (20 October 2019)

IFocus said:


> SP a group standing around nodding there heads in agreement is not a learning environment ever, its a .....gasp ....basket weavers club.
> 
> Next thing you maybe demanding is we all stand in and circle hands singing.
> 
> Smurf as to the level of acceptance / believing in authority etc I have never seen that to be the case as for asbestos I remember blokes cutting sheets of it using a 9" grinder year after year installing fences, companies and Governments were fully aware of the consequences this was in the 60's/70's I dont think anything has changed in that respect.



Actually I was only mentioning it as a reminder, as to Joe's wishes, if everyone is happy going headlong down this path fine.
If it ends with Joe closing the forum because of it, well IMO, not so fine.
If Joe doesn't mind it, well it is just a timely reminder, that people should be just as active in the stock related threads.
Just my opinion.


----------



## Smurf1976 (20 October 2019)

rederob said:


> In other words, we don't need to know too much about ENSOs or PDOs, or droughts or floods, because ultimately their effects will be subsumed by the mechanisms that drive actual energy flows into and out of the planet.



On that topic I'll simply say that there are real, actual climate researches who've suggested as plausible that a change in the frequency of ENSO cycles, or an imbalance, could well be a primary manifestation of climate change and that idea has been around for quite some years now.

Really though, this is a stock market forum and the thread is about freedom of speech and protest. It is not about climate.

I will simply say that I've been around long enough to observe a few things. In random order:

*There is no subject the basic concepts of which cannot be explained in layman's terms.

*Arguments that "you wouldn't understand" or the use of unnecessarily complex or unusual language are an attempt to mislead others or at best to avoid informing them.

*Those with nothing to hide do not seek to avoid scrutiny.

*The right to free speech is in practice usually the right to agree with whoever afforded you this right. Actual free speech exists but is relatively uncommon in practice.

*Baseless accusations, pedantic arguments, manufactured outrage, frivolous lawsuits and so on are aimed at avoiding discussion or implementation of something by means of wasting time until the other side either runs out of it or gives up and pursues some other opportunity.

I'll leave it at that and go back to discussing stocks and other investments. I'm not opposed to the concept of General Chat existing but this thread seems exceptionally pedantic and thus time wasting. 

If you call it a whatever the proper botanical name is, I call it a plant and someone else calls it a tree well then that's not particularly important in most contexts. It's the wooden thing sticking out of the ground with leaves on it yes and for most contexts that will be a sufficient level of detail.


----------



## rederob (20 October 2019)

Smurf1976 said:


> I'll leave it at that and go back to discussing stocks and other investments. I'm not opposed to the concept of General Chat existing but this thread seems exceptionally pedantic and thus time wasting.



Might be a good idea as I have repeatedly shown your arguments are unsound and your typical avoidance kicks in with an irrelevant diatribe.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 October 2019)

rederob said:


> Might be a good idea as I have repeatedly shown your arguments are unsound and your typical avoidance kicks in with an irrelevant diatribe.




In your own mind robbie.

I would take Smurfs precise observations over your vague verbosity any time.


----------



## Value Collector (21 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> What's the epistemology of opinion vs belief robbie ?




Maybe I can clarify some things here,

Opinions are things that are subjective to individuals, eg taste preferences.

Beliefs are simply things that a person believes, and can be true or false.

Knowledge is simply your accumulation of beliefs which are true.

Facts are things that are true regardless of your opinion, beliefs or knowledge.

Something is true, if it conforms to reality as it exists as regardless of your opinion, beliefs, knowledge.


----------



## rederob (21 October 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> In your own mind robbie.
> 
> I would take Smurfs precise observations over your vague verbosity any time.



This is not a competition.
Good posts are built on sound logic.
Presenting a defence to  post on a "sense" not in question is a defence of nothing, and this is happening repeatedly here.
As an aside, your post contains two logical fallacies - it might make you happy to say it, but it was not credible.
In terms of facts, the word count of @Smurf1976's last post was 306 while mine was 199.  Prior to that his response to my 174 word post (80 of which were quoted from IPCC AR5) contained 598 words. An earlier post to my 518 word post addressing 5 separate issues contained 774 words and addressed only one of my points.  So if you want to make claims about verbosity, you should start with a fact check.


----------



## wayneL (31 October 2019)

Finally, something I 100% agree with Obama on... calls out woke cancel culture.

Analysis:


----------



## qldfrog (31 October 2019)

I was impressed by Obama talk too
I found back the candidate who could write so good speech
The resulting observation is that, if he is still the man behind these reasonable intelligent talks, this means the power of lobbies and deep state in the US was really impressive even earlier on in his presidency as to be honest, his results were abysmal vs the promise
Good for him to challenge his own camp too


----------



## SirRumpole (2 November 2019)

qldfrog said:


> his [Obama] results were abysmal vs the promise




Basically every US President is pretty impotent domestically if they don't have a majority in both Houses.

Obama found that out and so will Trump.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 November 2019)

Morrison wants to crack down on boycotts of companies for "ethical" reasons.

So is he going to target people who are vegans because they object to the meat industry ?

It sounds another step down the road to totalitarianism to me.

Not a very Liberal thing to do.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...parks-free-speech-furore-20191101-p536o1.html


----------



## qldfrog (3 November 2019)

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11...ch-suspended-for-winning-by-too-much/11667252
I have a feeling this is actually linked to this thread concept
In that case, when facts do not agree with PC views, change the facts
All is good in lalaland


----------



## SirRumpole (3 November 2019)

qldfrog said:


> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11...ch-suspended-for-winning-by-too-much/11667252
> I have a feeling this is actually linked to this thread concept
> In that case, when facts do not agree with PC views, change the facts
> All is good in lalaland




Incredible. Blame the winning side. 

Maybe the losers should have tried harder.


----------



## Tink (10 January 2020)

*Vic govt push to cancel climate protest*

Climate activists are refusing to budge on a Melbourne protest planned for this Friday, despite state government and police pleas to call it off.

Two senior Victorian ministers have endorsed a police call for Uni Students for Climate Justice to abandon their protest on the state's next extreme fire-danger day.

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6571647/vic-govt-push-to-cancel-climate-protest/?cs=14231


----------



## wayneL (2 November 2020)

This is lovely LMAO


----------



## IFocus (2 November 2020)

I guess it must be more than 95% of news content published is by private businesses trying to make money often by advertisement that drives what's published.

They don't care what any one thinks its driven by the bottom line, read any Murdoch press to confirm.  

So I don't understand the claims of restrictions of freedom of speech, this is some thing Joe has also pointed out in a fashion. 

If governments force the removal of content like China then that's a restriction IMHO


----------



## moXJO (3 November 2020)

IFocus said:


> I guess it must be more than 95% of news content published is by private businesses trying to make money often by advertisement that drives what's published.
> 
> They don't care what any one thinks its driven by the bottom line, read any Murdoch press to confirm.
> 
> ...



Kicking and creating a stink, every time your rights are getting eroded is important. For the same reason our idiot twitter friend  from Waynes post now learnt. 

Give an inch they take a mile.


----------



## dutchie (11 November 2020)

Now Democrats want to create Blacklists.

Blacklisting is the action of a group or authority, compiling a blacklist of people, countries or other entities to be avoided or distrusted as being deemed unacceptable to those making the list. If someone is on a blacklist, they are seen by a government or other organization as being one of a number of people who cannot be trusted or who have done something wrong.


----------



## dutchie (26 November 2020)

Eventually the ruling elite will control the use of the internet.

Your freedom to use it will be restricted and monitored.


----------



## Smurf1976 (28 November 2020)

IFocus said:


> So I don't understand the claims of restrictions of freedom of speech, this is some thing Joe has also pointed out in a fashion.




Referring here to _any_ form of media, including forums and other online as well as traditional forms of media and even an in person debate in a room full of people, an issue which does seem to have arisen is that of simply silencing the opponent rather than engaging in sensible discussion.

As two cases in point, anyone who over the past few years pointed out the dangers of Australia's heavy reliance on trade with China tended to find themselves firmly shut down and accused of racism.

Anyone who points out that the harsh reality of climate change, that the trend in emissions remains firmly upwards, likewise tends to be shut down and labelled as a "denier" simply for pointing out the blunt truth of the situation.

Those are just two of the more contentious examples but certainly not the only ones. Intellectual debate based on facts, however unpleasant they may be, is out and "cancelling" the opponent is in. Pointing out the risks of an arrangement or that something isn't actually occurring in practice results in being labelled with a derogatory term and that's it, end of debate.

The climate issue in particular is one where, and I'm speaking with definite knowledge of what's going on here, rather a lot of those who could make a serious contribution have simply given up on the issue. They've had enough of being accused of this, that or something else simply for pointing out the brutal truth, that apart from COVID-related effects the trend in fossil fuel use remains upwards at the global level which is what counts, and have pretty much written the issue off as a waste of time so far as public debate is concerned.

Witness the shift in approach from government to simply pushing through big transmission and other electrical projects. Even the actual politicians have in many cases had enough of the nonsense debate surrounding it all. 

I wouldn't say that freedom of speech has been squashed as such, but the ability to bring the public along with meaningful discussion and debate has been lost due to the constant blah, blah, blah from those who don't want to hear the unpleasant facts on some of those matters. Point out the truth and get shouted down - after years of that the easier option of just doing things without any debate is unsurprisingly coming to the fore.

Elements of that have been quite visible on this forum indeed I'll go as far as saying it's a substantial part of why General Chat has become such a problem.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 November 2020)

Smurf1976 said:


> I wouldn't say that freedom of speech has been squashed as such, but the ability to bring the public along with meaningful discussion and debate has been lost due to the constant blah, blah, blah from those who don't want to hear the unpleasant facts on some of those matters. Point out the truth and get shouted down - after years of that the easier option of just doing things without any debate is unsurprisingly coming to the fore.




If anyone suggests in the mainstream media that there may be some aspect of personal responsibility for indigenous people to look after themselves and their children, there is an immediate outcry and claims of 'stolen generations' when children are removed from indigenous parents for the child's protection.

Child removal happens in the population at large when required, but if it happens to indigenous people it's racism.


----------



## basilio (28 November 2020)

Smurf1976 said:


> Anyone who points out that the harsh reality of climate change, that the trend in emissions remains firmly upwards, likewise tends to be shut down and labelled as a "denier" simply for pointing out the blunt truth of the situation.




I don't believe you meant to say it like this Smurf ? Scientists who point out CC  at the moment is very real and caused overwhelmingly by our actions are usually labelled as  "hysterical" or "alarmists" .  It is the CC change* deniers* who  have consistently  attempted to destroy confidence in science in their efforts to undermine actions to reduce our emissions.

That aside. Spot on analysis.


----------



## Smurf1976 (28 November 2020)

basilio said:


> I don't believe you meant to say it like this Smurf ?



To clarify, I mean that anyone who points out the reality that, effects of COVID-19 aside, the overall trend in emissions remains upward at the global level tends to not be received at all well by quite a few who prefer to sell a very different narrative that it's all being sorted.

Same goes for many debates and I've mentioned climate only because it's one of the most polarised debates in society at present (let's not debate the issue in this thread, that's not the subject).

Same goes for many things though. People are pigeon holed as being on one side or the other, the idea that anyone's simply sticking to actual facts is anathema to many.

As I see it the facts, however uncomfortable they may be, should always be presented if they're available. There's nothing to be gained by pretending that a situation is something other than what it actually is. If the facts are uncomfortable well then we need to change the situation not fudge the data or shout down those stating it.


----------



## basilio (28 November 2020)

Ok Smurf.  I think the confusion was around the use of the phrase "climate deniers" in the context of acknowledging the reality of CC and the intensifying effects. 

The core of your argument is the point. Facts should be agreed on.  The challenge today is "whose facts?"  .  And unfortunately the repeated disrespect of organisations, experts who highlight inconvenient facts undermines concerted action to tackle the issues.

_As I see it the facts, however uncomfortable they may be, should always be presented if they're available. There's nothing to be gained by pretending that a situation is something other than what it actually is. If the facts are uncomfortable well then we need to change the situation not fudge the data or shout down those stating it. _


----------



## sptrawler (28 November 2020)

There are non so blind, as those who do not want to see. I see no ships. What was that, that went through to the keeper.


----------



## Smurf1976 (28 November 2020)

Something I should add is that this also applies directly to investing.

If you’re on track to lose money then the sooner you realise that, the better. Denial can be seriously expensive.


----------



## wayneL (28 November 2020)

Smurf1976 said:


> Something I should add is that this also applies directly to investing.
> 
> If you’re on track to lose money then the sooner you realise that, the better. Denial can be seriously expensive.



True dat.

Sometimes the truth may be several layers down and outside of the mainstream narrative.

Macro investors understand that.


----------



## dutchie (28 November 2020)

Some good points made in the above posts.
I see that one of the current problems, with many of the important issues of today, is that you are either on one side or the other. 
The only debate is to argue who is the worst person for having their particular view.
I don't think this development is by accident.


----------



## macca (29 November 2020)

Having a different viewpoint than the other person has almost disappeared from society it seems.

I have heard it called passive aggression if I have a differing opinion.

The old saying of "lets agree to disagree" seems to no longer be acceptable

It does make any discussion rather boring though, it is now a case of speak first and loud and no one will disagree


----------



## sptrawler (29 November 2020)

How many times nowadays, do you find yourself stopping halfway through writing something or saying something and decide no it will just start an argument.
I know I do it all the time, because I like to discuss and thrash something out, to try to separate the chaff from the hay, these days it is nearly impossible because many just take what the media say as fact without questioning, researching or challenging it, but use it as being the gospel because some reported wrote it or said it.
Laziness is permeating through western society and will end up being the reason it collapses, what was it JFK said "ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country", well I think that is laughable these days.
Just my opinion and fortunately I can still give, for how long, who knows. 
The media and the fanatics have become the  etiquette police and believe their interpretation of the rules is law, when in fact it isn't law it is just their opinion.
A number of recent cases have shown this, Westpac was taken to court for lending money to people who couldn't afford it, yet it wasn't the persons fault who could have given false and misleading statements. it was thrown out.
The Israel Folau case where he made a religious statement that included reference to sectors of society, he was persecuted for it and it didn't get to court. Margaret Court was dragged into the same trail by media.
I wonder how long it will be before you can be jailed for having an opinion.
Interesting times IMO.


----------



## Knobby22 (29 November 2020)

wayneL said:


> True dat.
> 
> Sometimes the truth may be several layers down and outside of the mainstream narrative.
> 
> Macro investors understand that.



Yes, you see investors lose all the time who can't see the obvious due to some ideological brainwashing.

For instance, all the people who believed the rubbish about covid having little effect. Remember that Republican senator saying everything was OK while selling nearly half a billion shares?

I made a very healthy 75% return in five months by doing the opposite of what he said. He reportedly made double that but he had inside information.


----------



## basilio (29 November 2020)

Knobby22 said:


> Remember that Republican senator saying everything was OK while selling nearly half a billion shares?




I do indeed .. I wonder what happened to him ? I'm sure he must have been busted for insider trading  (he sold the shares before the official announcements) or abuse of office or something ?

Or did it all just slide away  without consequence beyond the millions he made selling before the market collapsed?


----------



## Knobby22 (29 November 2020)

basilio said:


> I do indeed .. I wonder what happened to him ? I'm sure he must have been busted for insider trading  (he sold the shares before the official announcements) or abuse of office or something ?
> 
> Or did it all just slide away  without consequence beyond the millions he made selling before the market collapsed?



He didn't break the law. He is OK.
All forgotten now.


----------



## basilio (29 November 2020)

Knobby22 said:


> He didn't break the law. He is OK.
> All forgotten now.




I don't believe that was what was reported at the time .








						4 U.S. senators sold stock after getting coronavirus threat briefings in January
					

The moves spark concerns that they put safeguarding their private finances before their duty to protect public health.



					fortune.com


----------



## Knobby22 (29 November 2020)

basilio said:


> I don't believe that was what was reported at the time .
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I thought there was more money involved. Burr did giving public assurances while he sold. Pretty reprehensible. Fox were pretty upset as they were playing it down and he was seen as being an insider.
Reuters article is better. Probably getting a bit of thread drift.

U.S. senators defend selling shares before coronavirus crash | Reuters https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-congress-idUSKBN2171AL


----------



## moXJO (30 November 2020)

Knobby22 said:


> Yes, you see investors lose all the time who can't see the obvious due to some ideological brainwashing.
> 
> For instance, all the people who believed the rubbish about covid having little effect. Remember that Republican senator saying everything was OK while selling nearly half a billion shares?
> 
> I made a very healthy 75% return in five months by doing the opposite of what he said. He reportedly made double that but he had inside information.



Covid was declared a pandemic on the 11 March. First reported here about jan 24. I had to recheck their sell date and it was roughly feb 13.

Its not illegal.


----------



## Knobby22 (30 November 2020)

moXJO said:


> Covid was declared a pandemic on the 11 March. First reported here about jan 24. I had to recheck their sell date and it was roughly feb 13.
> 
> Its not illegal.




No not illegal. Its known that some people talk up the market while they are selling.
He didn't get in much trouble. Mainly annoyance with some Fox commentators who believed him as he had inside information and they didn't sell. All forgotten.


----------



## wayneL (30 November 2020)

Knobby22 said:


> Yes, you see investors lose all the time who can't see the obvious due to some ideological brainwashing.
> 
> For instance, all the people who believed the rubbish about covid having little effect. Remember that Republican senator saying everything was OK while selling nearly half a billion shares?
> 
> I made a very healthy 75% return in five months by doing the opposite of what he said. He reportedly made double that but he had inside information.



I kind of look at it the other way around. One can have whatever version of facts or ideology or whatever that they want. However, what one thinks should be or should happen is irrelevant.

One must examine the ideological reality of government and central bank responses to a given situation and invest or trade accordingly, no matter what ones own political and economic schools think.

In the end the result is the same, invest for *is. Just be prepared to jump out of the way when the *real reality bites.

<Eta> Damn I hate autocorrect


----------



## qldfrog (6 December 2020)

2 or 3d ago, not sure when, i saw a long article on the abc news website explaini g how a bill was being passed giving police ansd asio the ability to take over social media account of suspected terrorist,pedophile, the usual list of "baddies"
There were 3 specific bills detailed..so not a vague arricle, one was quoted and gsve the police asio the ability to not only delete but also modify data..
Just think about it: what i am typing here could be legally change by the state and turned into on incitation to murdering or sexual agression you nsme it.so the next day i could be sent to jail wo family or lawyer alerted if they so wish and maintained there indefinitively.
That really scared me, worse the fact that today, i can not find that article anywhere after quite a few searches
So, *has anyone else read it?*, and is Australia not only turning into a Stalinian republic, but is actually already there to the point of fully controlled media and Propaganda
Once again, probably 3 pages of scrolling, argument presented by a defender of human rights etc...
And happy to receive any link if still available.
It is not possible i was dreaming all this


----------



## Knobby22 (6 December 2020)

qldfrog said:


> 2 or 3d ago, not sure when, i saw a long article on the abc news website explaini g how a bill was being passed giving police ansd asio the ability to take over social media account of suspected terrorist,pedophile, the usual list of "baddies"
> There were 3 specific bills detailed..so not a vague arricle, one was quoted and gsve the police asio the ability to not only delete but also modify data..
> Just think about it: what i am typing here could be legally change by the state and turned into on incitation to murdering or sexual agression you nsme it.so the next day i could be sent to jail wo family or lawyer alerted if they so wish and maintained there indefinitively.
> That really scared me, worse the fact that today, i can not find that article anywhere after quite a few searches
> ...



I have seen news disappear before about 15 years ago.

Australia does not and never has had Freedom of speech as a right. We have never signed the charter with the UN and the Libs are against us signing and I agree, just be a lawyers picnic.

The Government attitude is that they need these abilities to combat other nations operating within this country.
If ASIO has the ability to arrest the operative and clandestinely operate the account to catch other perpetrators then I am for it.

Of course there are risks with this.
I am concerned with overreach as the government combats the new realities.

Britain and NZ operate the same though and in my opinion our democracies are better than others. We don't have a Presidential system where power can be easily abused (as we have seen).

We do have vigilance measures operating within Parliament and the 4th estate through the ABC are still effective.
It is important they are not weakened. The Afghanistan incident shows they are still strong at present.

As a democracy we need to be able to fight without one hand tied behind our back


----------



## Knobby22 (6 December 2020)

These policies were announced and debated in Parliament by the way


----------



## qldfrog (6 December 2020)

Knobby22 said:


> These policies were announced and debated in Parliament by the way



Should be, they were votedi am ok with deleting data..imagine child pr0n images , etc but no way should they be able to create edit, that means open legal way to fabricate what is later used as evidence.just think about it.similar of having an overwrite mode on your speed camera

As for the media, seriously?
If ABC is a counterweight..not that strong as we can see in this very example see how they present the fact that a mayor who should be elected based on our democratic rules has seen a retrospective ruling passed in qld parliament to throw it out..and people laught at Trump allegations?
ABC investigations are very selective snd playing very well in the reset spirit: globalist attacking right wing..obviously nearly fair when you consider and accept they are a leftist media, pillars of national identity: christianity, army, a bit of anti china/russia and destroying unity and favoring globalism. That woll not save democracies or freedom


With democraties like us or the US, or even France which has de facto bypassed parliament and became a Macron dictatorship a few months ago, we can not blame Putin or Xi
None of these would have been accepted silently by amnesty international or unions/people 50 y ago 
The great reset: sheeples by the millions fed FB craps, propaganda and cats pictures/pr0n..but they will all have universal income so what to complain about...
Yeap still unable to find the silenced article so far


----------



## qldfrog (6 December 2020)

Knobby22 said:


> I have seen news disappear before about 15 years ago.
> 
> Australia does not and never has had Freedom of speech as a right. We have never signed the charter with the UN and the Libs are against us signing and I agree, just be a lawyers picnic.
> 
> ...



Disagree on some of contents but like the debateanyway time to get a life while i still can.not in lockdown yet


----------



## dutchie (6 December 2020)

This is how political threads work on ASF.........


----------



## satanoperca (7 December 2020)

Many years ago while in Italy, a retired furniture designer gave me an insight into what makes a good furniture designer.
"The difference between good and brilliant design, is not the individual designs that make a difference, it is how often people are told one design is more brilliant than the other"

Nothing has changed, if you repeat a story often enough, even if it is not real/factually correct, people will believe it.

Humans are dumb.


----------



## basilio (7 December 2020)

Is this what "Freedom of Speech" looks like in the 21st Century

The President of the United States at a campaign rally flatly denying he has lost an election when the votes have been decisively counted against him and then proclaiming he would be a "gracious loser if he lost"  ?

Truly this is beyond satire, beyond parody, beyond .... ?


----------



## moXJO (7 December 2020)

satanoperca said:


> Show us the truth?
> 
> Give you a helping hand. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Betoota_Advocate
> _The Betoota Advocate_ has grown to be Australia's most popular satirical news site, garnering a larger readership within Australia than popular U.S. satire site _The Onion_ and Australian site _The Shovel_.



The content is closer to the truth. Or do you not read.


----------



## satanoperca (7 December 2020)

moXJO said:


> The content is closer to the truth. Or do you not read.



I'm a bit slow, you were being satirical.


----------



## moXJO (7 December 2020)

satanoperca said:


> I'm a bit slow, you were being satirical.



Wait I thought you were being satirical.
Too close to the truth....


----------



## sptrawler (8 December 2020)

Apparently Labor want an inquiry into right wing extremists, I wish they would just have an inquiry into extremists.








						Labor pushes for inquiry into right-wing extremism
					

Federal Parliament’s peak security committee will be asked to open an immediate inquiry into right-wing extremism amid fears the coronavirus crisis is fuelling conditions that intensify the threat.




					www.watoday.com.au
				



From the article:
_Labor home affairs spokeswoman Kristina Keneally said the pandemic increased the risk of right-wing extremism due to factors such as rising unemployment, an increase in time spent on screens and an outbreak of racist rhetoric about the source of COVID-19. 

Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton has emphasised the importance of focusing on threats from all sources rather than the underlying ideology_.

Hopefully they can find common ground and maybe stop extremists from being able to use social media to distort information and radicalise, people to their extreme views.


----------



## moXJO (8 December 2020)

sptrawler said:


> Apparently Labor want an inquiry into right wing extremists, I wish they would just have an inquiry into extremists.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Ban social media if they were serious about tackling extremism. It would up productivity and lower mental health problems as well. Media needs a kick up the arse as well. 

Bit rich coming from Labor. I've seen some of the loonytoons commenting on Scomos and other liberals social media. Noticed some clumsy attempts on dan andrews during covid.
Labor is well known to have organised groups doing its dirty work. Similar to the multiple groups in the US.

We are following a US trend that won't end well.


----------



## sptrawler (8 December 2020)

moXJO said:


> Ban social media if they were serious about tackling extremism. It would up productivity and lower mental health problems as well. Media needs a kick up the arse as well.
> 
> Bit rich coming from Labor. I've seen some of the loonytoons commenting on Scomos and other liberals social media. Noticed some clumsy attempts on dan andrews during covid.
> Labor is well known to have organised groups doing its dirty work. Similar to the multiple groups in the US.
> ...



Yes Labor seem to be like most extremists, extremely anti anyone who doesn't have the same beliefs as them, like you say moxjo banning social media would be the answer.
Social media does a lot of great things, but I feel the negative outcomes of social media, far outweigh the positive outcomes.
As for mainstream media, as I have previously stated, we don't watch any news, just read what interests us on the internet, with T.V they have captive audiences and is aptly named the 'idiot box'.
Our PVR gets a good work out lol, the old Tivo is still going strong.


----------



## moXJO (8 December 2020)

I should add that once the right gets grassroots movements and they gain traction, we will end up as bad as the US.

Years ago I mentioned that the more the left pushed its PC, or extreme agenda that we eventually would see violence from the right. 
This ideological war needs to be toned back. I don't like scomo but some of the ridiculous bs about him is obviously a targeted attack by certain groups. I thought Dan andrews absolutely stuffed up covid responses and was dangerously stomping on rights, but he managed to dial it back. 

If all you think in is black and white then realised you have fallen prey to this outrage brainwashing going on.


----------



## IFocus (8 December 2020)

Labor extreme?

Not another Trump thread?

Australian security services have already clearly stated the largest risk of extremists are from the right, but then what would they know?


----------



## moXJO (8 December 2020)

IFocus said:


> Labor extreme?
> 
> Not another Trump thread?
> 
> Australian security services have already clearly stated the largest risk of extremists are from the right, but then what would they know?



Sorry. Labor supporters comments. 

You were the one I mentioned it to from memory.


----------



## sptrawler (8 December 2020)

IFocus said:


> Labor extreme?
> 
> Not another Trump thread?
> 
> Australian security services have already clearly stated the largest risk of extremists are from the right, but then what would they know?



We were talking regards social media and did say *all extremists *should be investigated, not just right wing, but hey why not change the meaning with selective quotes. Nothing like putting things out of context, seems to be a skill set.

My original opinion regarding Labors proposal for an inquiry into right wing extremists.
_Apparently Labor want an inquiry into right wing extremists, I wish they would just have an inquiry into extremists_.

I wonder how the media would take it if Morrison said he wanted an investigation into left wing extremists, some on here would be falling out of their trees, like I said if an investigation is held it should cover all extremists. 
Middle Australia is $hit scared to say anything these days, for fear of upsetting either group of extremists, the very thing that made Australia great is being completely destroyed.
Calling a spade a spade, standing up for their mates, saying what you feel is right. 
Yep we will just be another country, driven by the vocal minority IMO.


----------



## grah33 (9 December 2020)

Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Bill 2020 :



			https://content.legislation.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/bills/591143bi1.pdf


----------



## satanoperca (9 December 2020)

sptrawler said:


> We were talking regards social media and did say *all extremists *should be investigated, not just right wing, but hey why not change the meaning with selective quotes. Nothing like putting things out of context, seems to be a skill set.
> 
> My original opinion regarding Labors proposal for an inquiry into right wing extremists.
> _Apparently Labor want an inquiry into right wing extremists, I wish they would just have an inquiry into extremists_.
> ...



No we don't it is only the right that are extreme, lol.


----------



## Smurf1976 (10 December 2020)

sptrawler said:


> Middle Australia is $hit scared to say anything these days, for fear of upsetting either group of extremists, the very thing that made Australia great is being completely destroyed.



Practical reality is that public debate, on any subject, has become something that anyone able to objectively assess all sides of an argument or who has real knowledge of specific subjects has by now concluded is a waste of time.

There's only so many times you can tell people that 3 + 2 doesn't equal 10 and be shouted down for not engaging in the groupthink which says it's all fine before you conclude that you'd be better spending your time more productively on something, anything, else. 

End result is those left are the extremists lacking in real knowledge and that goes for lots of issues.


----------



## dutchie (10 December 2020)

Good to see one university hold up to its role to foster free speech.
Other universities should take note.

*Cambridge University votes to safeguard free speech*










						Cambridge University votes to safeguard free speech
					

Cambridge University changes guidelines to protect free speech and allow controversial speakers.



					www.bbc.com
				





Not too sure why the BBC would print this article.


----------



## sptrawler (10 December 2020)

sptrawler said:


> Middle Australia is $hit scared to say anything these days, for fear of upsetting either group of extremists, the very thing that made Australia great is being completely destroyed.
> Calling a spade a spade, standing up for their mates, saying what you feel is right.
> Yep we will just be another country, driven by the vocal minority IMO.




A good article written by JK Rowling, about the difficulty these days speaking out, whether it is right or wrong you will be attacked by extremists.









						'This climate of fear serves nobody well,' says J.K. Rowling
					

The Harry Potter author said she received "heartbreaking" letters following backlash from fans and film stars.




					www.smh.com.au


----------



## satanoperca (10 December 2020)

Freedom of speech. What does it mean today?
Some time ago, it meant face to face discussion, not today.
People can hide who they are via the internet, does that mean their voice should be heard?
I personally, every time I have had a confrontation with anyone on any forums, PM with my phone number and personal details.
Why, it is easier to be a keyboard warrior, much harder to debate on the phone or catch up at the pub.

*The issue is not freedom of speech, it is that the internet provides anonymity.*

So should those who will not expose who they have a voice?

NO.


----------



## Smurf1976 (10 December 2020)

satanoperca said:


> People can hide who they are via the internet, does that mean their voice should be heard?



That has always been the case to some extent though.

Plenty of callers to talkback radio with fake personal circumstances and backgrounds.

The supposed truck driver who’s actually a paid lobbyist for a large corporation.

The retiree living in a small town who turned out to be an actual current Member of Parliament.

Someone in their mid-20’s who claimed to not know that the largest nightclub in town opened late at night when buying property directly opposite.

The woman who wrote to the paper with a name that doesn’t exist and who gave their addresss as vacant land owned by a very large factory.

Agreed with the point but fake personalities and false names were being used by those seeking to sway opinion long before the internet.

Long time ago, 1990’s, I had a list of the multiple names known to be used by certain individuals for their letters to newspapers all of which were on the same subject and expressing the same view.

Then there’s those who went to the same public forum in every town it went to, strategically placed themselves so as to have one at every table, and thus managed to produce an impression of widespread opposition to anyone who they didn’t agree with and promptly silence them. It fooled those not in the know as to what the game was. They didn’t use fake names, but certainly highly deceptive in failing to disclose that they were there to ensure that the media reported that the majority supported their view.

Agreed with the point but the problem existed well before the internet.

Then there’s “fake news” in the form of things like nice scenic photos of places that have nothing to do with a proposed development. That one was around decades ago.


----------



## wayneL (10 December 2020)

If, in the 99.9% chance of Joey becoming leader of the "free" world. I think the world is big going to become a hell of a lot less free, including in the People's Republic of Australia.

How sad that, at some point, another generation of young people will have to die in the name of liberty.


----------



## dutchie (10 December 2020)

wayneL said:


> If, in the 99.9% chance of Joey becoming leader of the "free" world. I think the world is big going to become a hell of a lot less free, including in the People's Republic of Australia.
> 
> How sad that, at some point, another generation of young people will have to die in the name of liberty.




Another nail in the coffin. Social media companies need to be trimmed (but the elite/govt. don't want to).
Free speech is like a frog in a pot of hot water.
The majority just don't know it.


----------



## IFocus (10 December 2020)

wayneL said:


> If, in the 99.9% chance of Joey becoming leader of the "free" world. I think the world is big going to become a hell of a lot less free, including in the People's Republic of Australia.
> 
> How sad that, at some point, another generation of young people will have to die in the name of liberty.






This has nothing to do with free speech, its a business decision nothing more.

Its owned by a business entity.

The serious infringement to free speech is when some one gets convicted in secret that cannot be reported, or  police carry out searches of journalists work places or homes as a threat, or whistle blowers are run through the courts for telling the public how criminal our government has been etc.

All of this is happening now.


----------



## wayneL (10 December 2020)

IFocus said:


> This has nothing to do with free speech, its a business decision nothing more.
> 
> Its owned by a business entity.
> 
> ...



1) I'd like to know the business case for such a decision

2) That is fair comment if these tech firms are running a publishing outfit. But when they purport to be running a platform, it is a different ball game.

3) Would your opinion be the same if it was left wing activists that were exclusively being censored?

This are points that we have gone over ad nauseam that the left next never seem to be able to address intelligently.


----------



## satanoperca (10 December 2020)

Smurf1976 said:


> That has always been the case to some extent though.
> 
> Plenty of callers to talkback radio with fake personal circumstances and backgrounds.
> 
> ...



I fully agree with your statements, 100%.

But the difference today is *scale/volume*, the internet lets 100,000,000 voices, anonymous voices to be counted or heard.

This is a great example and the comments as well.









						Mary’s stand by public statement after removing link from social media
					

The owners of a hip inner-Sydney burger joint have quietly deleted a statement and social media post about poor staff attitudes, mental health and “work-life balance” after making headlines around the country.




					www.news.com.au
				




They flip burgers, let them run their business, if the burgers are s----t, they don't have a business.


----------



## Smurf1976 (10 December 2020)

wayneL said:


> 1) I'd like to know the business case for such a decision



Whatever appeals to the advertisers.

Same with all media. Don't hold your breath for a certain major newspaper company to say anything bad about a well known large discount store or an even better known hardware shop. For reasons I'm not sure of they also like Sophie Monk - for whatever reason people far more famous get a lot less coverage than she does.

That said, sometimes the media is useful to confirm my investment thinking. One of the newspapers has been on about people failing to adapt to the death of inflation and so on recently. That aligns with my thinking very nicely - reason they're not adapting is because it's not dead.........


----------



## wayneL (10 December 2020)

Smurf1976 said:


> Whatever appeals to the advertisers.



I find it rather curious that a lot of the YouTube channels that I follow, though completely demonetized still manage to have companies keen to advertise on their shows.


> Same with all media. Don't hold your breath for a certain major newspaper company to say anything bad about a well known large discount store or an even better known hardware shop. For reasons I'm not sure of they also like Sophie Monk - for whatever reason people far more famous get a lot less coverage than she does.



It's still brings up the publisher v platform conundrum and tech firms have well and truly crossed over the line, and I'm buggered if I know why they haven't been reined in...

... Actually I think I do know why.

And as far as Sophie Monk goes, I share your bewilderment.




> That said, sometimes the media is useful to confirm my investment thinking. One of the newspapers has been on about people failing to adapt to the death of inflation and so on recently. That aligns with my thinking very nicely - reason they're not adapting is because it's not dead.........




This actually deserves a thread of it's own. Economists argue over the *true nature of inflation just like theologians argue over the nature of the God head.

I've listened to hours upon hours on this topic from various economists and I'm still none-the-wiser.

But what is for sure is that, as you have noted, rumours of inflation's demise have been greatly exaggerated.

<ETA> this is my latest conspiracy theory: autocorrect is specifically designed to make me look semi literate.


----------



## IFocus (10 December 2020)

wayneL said:


> 1) I'd like to know the business case for such a decision
> 
> 2) That is fair comment if these tech firms are running a publishing outfit. But when they purport to be running a platform, it is a different ball game.
> 
> ...





I don't think its a left right thing for businesses but possible a negative thing ....possibly who knows.

Our immediate threat to freedoms is government policy particularly framed around terrorism attacks.


----------



## sptrawler (10 December 2020)

IFocus said:


> This has nothing to do with free speech, its a business decision nothing more.
> 
> Its owned by a business entity.
> 
> ...



And has been for a long, long time.


----------



## orr (11 December 2020)

IFocus said:


> I don't think its a left right thing for businesses but possible a negative thing ....possibly who knows.
> 
> Our immediate threat to freedoms is government policy particularly framed around terrorism attacks.




nothing more dangerous than to embarass the powerful ... we owe a great debt to Witness K, Bernnard Collaery, Anika Smethurst, the ABC and the unmentionable Assange... and the more mentionable Snowden. 

That the prattling  unsubstantiable drivel that the ill-equipped, conspiratorially minded, nazi sympathizing ( where's that Blair _witch_ Cottrel ***t these days... I'm sure the AFP have got a pretty good idea) and rest that the utter loons ply, gets short shrift and not before time, should give all us hope.

Houdini would have cancelled Conan Doyle.... and for good reason. He knew illusion when he saw it.


----------



## sptrawler (5 January 2021)

Mt Bean, chimes in on the freedom of speech debate.









						Rowan Atkinson says cancel culture is a  'medieval mob looking for someone to burn'
					

The star of Blackadder and Mr Bean says online witch hunts are creating a simplistic, binary view of society.




					www.smh.com.au
				



From the article:

Atkinson has now said that online witch hunts are "scary for anyone who's a victim of that mob". He said: "The problem we have online is that an algorithm decides what we want to see, which ends up creating a simplistic, binary view of society. It becomes a case of either you're with us or against us. If you're against us, you deserve to be 'cancelled'."

The star added that the popularity of the largely mute Mr Bean may be down to the character being verbally unable to offend those with "greater sensitivities", and said this could explain his success in "Muslim countries" and places with "stricter creative regimes".
Despite the huge popularity of Mr Bean, Atkinson has decided not to have an online presence, saying that social media is "a sideshow in my world".
The actor has followed his former _Blackadder_ co-star Tony Robinson, who played Baldrick, in criticising cancel culture. 

Robinson told _The Daily Telegraph_ last year that calling out and censoring unpopular opinions "is walking the path of the devil".

The actor and presenter said he was passionate about free speech, adding: "It defends our liberty, and I'm very unhappy with the idea that, just because someone is offended by what I say, I shouldn't be allowed to say it."


----------



## dutchie (5 January 2021)

Big tech. is censoring free speech. It determines what you can and can't hear/see.
Is this their role? Who voted them in to do that?
Break up Big tech.  Especially Google - which is the most dangerous company in the world.


----------



## sptrawler (5 January 2021)

dutchie said:


> Big tech. is censoring free speech. It determines what you can and can't hear/see.
> Is this their role? Who voted them in to do that?
> Break up Big tech.  Especially Google - which is the most dangerous company in the world.



I think what Rowan Atkinson said nailed it really, the big tech companies use algorithms to monitor what you search, then just feed your enquiry. 
That really sums up why you have some posters, with unlimited supply of the same stuff, the search engine feeds their paranoia and the circle repeats.


----------



## Knobby22 (5 January 2021)

dutchie said:


> Big tech. is censoring free speech. It determines what you can and can't hear/see.
> Is this their role? Who voted them in to do that?
> Break up Big tech.  Especially Google - which is the most dangerous company in the world.



Breaking up Google was one of the promises Biden made. Let's see if the Republicans let him do it or will they block it in the Senate?


----------



## sptrawler (5 January 2021)

Knobby22 said:


> Breaking up Google was one of the promises Biden made. Let's see if the Republicans let him do it or will they block it in the Senate?



Yes, the problem you have with google is, they are the goto browser for most people, that isn't a problem unless google becomes a problem.
Then google or any other company, that has so much influence on what you read, can manipulate the opinion of the populace by misdirection.

It is a bit like the argument about Australia isn't doing enough to get rid of coal power stations, in reality the problem probably is, they will be shut down earlier than anyone thought.
Yet people argued black and blue, that we are trying to keep them going, just to spite the world.

It is difficult following who the media are trying to rally, it seems the media are trying to place themselves, their blogs, prognosis and opinion, above that of the Government. If the Government say something, much of the media deride it, then when it is proven correct actively support it, it seems as though the media in Aus suffers from the "no what did you say" inferiority complex.

If the media having more credibility than the establishment does eventuate it will be an interesting world, the media will just type in the reality they want the population to believe, actually it is probably at a balance point as we speak IMO.
All just my opinion.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 January 2021)

sptrawler said:


> If the media having more credibility than the establishment does eventuate it will be an interesting world, the media will just type in the reality they want the population to believe, actually




They already do.

Read/seen any Murdoch media lately ?


----------



## rederob (6 January 2021)

dutchie said:


> Big tech. is censoring free speech. It determines what you can and can't hear/see.
> Is this their role? Who voted them in to do that?
> Break up Big tech.  Especially Google - which is the most dangerous company in the world.



Can you please show how this is true.
I interchange search engines - there are over a dozen to choose from - and further refine my parameters when there appears to be little of relevance.  So *it is the user who is in control of what they want to find*.
If something exists in digital form and its content is searchable, it can be found.
Maybe people need to be trained to better use the internet.
From what I read at ASF the issue is not what people are reading but, instead, believing their sources irrespective of credibility.


----------



## dutchie (6 January 2021)

rederob said:


> Can you please show how this is true.
> I interchange search engines - there are over a dozen to choose from - and further refine my parameters when there appears to be little of relevance.  So *it is the user who is in control of what they want to find*.
> If something exists in digital form and its content is searchable, it can be found.
> Maybe people need to be trained to better use the internet.
> From what I read at ASF the issue is not what people are reading but, instead, believing their sources irrespective of credibility.



What you say is correct, to a degree.
Searching the internet is definitely a skill you need to develop and people (me included) do indeed go to sources that reinforce their believes, rightly or wrongly.
However there is a certain amount of censorship on big tech's behalf. You might remember the censored news regarding Biden's sons laptop...
*The Censored Hunter Biden Laptop Story Is Coming Back to Bite Twitter Big Time*








						The Censored Hunter Biden Laptop Story Is Coming Back to Bite Twitter Big Time
					

Remember the Hunter Biden laptop story? The story that the Big Tech and media giants censored before the election because it would hurt their candidate, Hunter’s dad, Joe Biden? Remember when Tw...




					pjmedia.com
				




and recently this...
*RADIO GAG-GAG* *YouTube sparks free speech scandal after banning talkRADIO for debating the Covid lockdown*








						YouTube sparks free speech row after banning talkRADIO for debating lockdown
					

YOUTUBE sparked a free-speech scandal yesterday by banning talkRADIO from its platform for debating the UK’s Covid lockdown. The video-sharing site – owned by US search giant Google …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## sptrawler (6 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> They already do.
> 
> Read/seen any Murdoch media lately ?



Yes and I dont think it is only limited to Murdoch, it is on both sides. However I think companies like google, have far more reach and influence than the media, these days.


----------



## rederob (6 January 2021)

dutchie said:


> What you say is correct, to a degree.
> Searching the internet is definitely a skill you need to develop and people (me included) do indeed go to sources that reinforce their believes, rightly or wrongly.
> However there is a certain amount of censorship on big tech's behalf. You might remember the censored news regarding Biden's sons laptop...
> *The Censored Hunter Biden Laptop Story Is Coming Back to Bite Twitter Big Time*
> ...



Nobody has unfettered and free access to carriage services.  Moreover, carriage services have a right to determine what they carry.
WRT Hunter Biden, it appears reputable media chose to run with what was credible.  Those searching for conspiracy theories on Hunter could find them easily enough.
Again, where is your evidence that "free speech" is not possible?


----------



## dutchie (6 January 2021)

rederob said:


> Nobody has unfettered and free access to carriage services.  Moreover, carriage services have a right to determine what they carry.
> WRT Hunter Biden, it appears reputable media chose to run with what was credible.  Those searching for conspiracy theories on Hunter could find them easily enough.
> Again, where is your evidence that "free speech" is not possible?



As far as I am concerned my second reference is a good example.
It appears that our concepts of  "free speech" differ.


----------



## rederob (6 January 2021)

dutchie said:


> As far as I am concerned my second reference is a good example.
> It appears that our concepts of  "free speech" differ.



I can find everything about Hunter that has been posted and is searchable, so people are free to post whatever they want (lawfully).
You seem to be commenting on what organisations choose to carry, and they are commercial decisions they are at liberty to make.
So again, where is free speech being curtailed?


----------



## SirRumpole (6 January 2021)

rederob said:


> Nobody has unfettered and free access to carriage services. Moreover, carriage services have a right to determine what they carry.




Exactly, they can deny free speech by simply not publishing stories.

eg if politician A gives a speech a media organisation can choose to publish it in full, in part, not at all , put it on the front page or back page depending on how it fits in with their own ideology.


----------



## sptrawler (6 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Exactly, they can deny free speech by simply not publishing stories.
> 
> eg if politician A gives a speech a media organisation can choose to publish it in full, in part, not at all , put it on the front page or back page depending on how it fits in with their own ideology.



That definitely happens, back in the 1970's, I was involved in a large strike causing a lot of disruption, a situation arose where volunteers were asked to sort a problem while on strike. 
If the problem hadn't been solved certain mines would have flooded, anyway the guys went and fixed the problem no pay etc, when the info was sent to the media to show we were acting responsibly, it didn't get a run.


----------



## moXJO (6 January 2021)

rederob said:


> I can find everything about Hunter that has been posted and is searchable, so people are free to post whatever they want (lawfully).
> You seem to be commenting on what organisations choose to carry, and they are commercial decisions they are at liberty to make.
> So again, where is free speech being curtailed?



Google search engine is used across many other search engines. They pick, choose and suppress what your search results can be. Given the influence they have over information they have created a problem around elections. 

There is an obvious problem.


----------



## rederob (6 January 2021)

moXJO said:


> Google search engine is used across many other search engines. They pick, choose and suppress what your search results can be. Given the influence they have over information they have created a problem around elections.
> 
> There is an obvious problem.



If you do not like Google, then use DuckDuckGo or any of the other dozen or so search engines.
The point here is that the internet does not of itself prevent you from exercising your right to "speak."
As earlier posters have pointed out you are not prevented from telling someone something (within the constraints of the law), or making a statement somewhere.  However, nothing requires that whatever you said must appear on any carriage service.


----------



## moXJO (6 January 2021)

rederob said:


> If you do not like Google, then use DuckDuckGo or any of the other dozen or so search engines.
> The point here is that the internet does not of itself prevent you from exercising your right to "speak."
> As earlier posters have pointed out you are not prevented from telling someone something (within the constraints of the law), or making a statement somewhere.  However, nothing requires that whatever you said must appear on any carriage service.



Yeah fair enough.


----------



## wayneL (6 January 2021)

rederob said:


> If you do not like Google, then use DuckDuckGo or any of the other dozen or so search engines.
> The point here is that the internet does not of itself prevent you from exercising your right to "speak."
> As earlier posters have pointed out you are not prevented from telling someone something (within the constraints of the law), or making a statement somewhere.  However, nothing requires that whatever you said must appear on any carriage service.



It is a grey area though, as said carriage services have the benefits of being a platform rather than a publisher.

As these certain platforms are all pervasive, it can be argued that they are important as vessels of free speech. Yet these platforms regularly "deplatform" certain contributors who they deem to have incorrect politics.

In so doing, it can be argued they're becoming a publisher rather than a platform, _ipso facto_ preventing free speech.

They would have an argument if they were considered as publishers under the law, but they do have to protections other platform, so I do think it is a very fuzzy line and trading on the very raggedy edge of preventing free speech.


----------



## rederob (6 January 2021)

wayneL said:


> It is a grey area though, as said carriage services have the benefits of being a platform rather than a publisher.
> 
> As these certain platforms are all pervasive, it can be argued that they are important as vessels of free speech. Yet these platforms regularly "deplatform" certain contributors who they deem to have incorrect politics.
> 
> ...



Can you please explain how *free speech* is at issue, as nothing suggests that is the case.  
All I keep reading from similar posts to this is that you don't like the practices of some carriers wrt to what is "carried" or how easily it can be found.


----------



## wayneL (6 January 2021)

rederob said:


> Can you please explain how *free speech* is at issue, as nothing suggests that is the case.
> All I keep reading from similar posts to this is that you don't like the practices of some carriers wrt to what is "carried" or how easily it can be found.



Refer to my post, as I said, it's a grey area, with issues as I see them already stated.

It's not that hard, Rob.


----------



## rederob (7 January 2021)

wayneL said:


> Refer to my post, as I said, it's a grey area, with issues as I see them already stated.
> 
> It's not that hard, Rob.



Perhaps you can instead explain how a person is being denied their ability to "speak" as you are claiming their free speech is *prevented*.
Preventing free speech is black or white, never grey.


----------



## wayneL (7 January 2021)

rederob said:


> Perhaps you can instead explain how a person is being denied their ability to "speak" as you are claiming their free speech is *prevented*.
> Preventing free speech is black or white, never grey.



Let's suppose speaker A and speaker B are at speakers corner in Hyde Park

Speaker B is moved on, or even detained because the opinions expressed are *deemed* offensive ( but not illegal).

Speaker B may still be able to express his opinion in a pub, but not at speakers corner as is his purported right.

Is it your view that speaker B has freedom of speech?


----------



## rederob (7 January 2021)

wayneL said:


> Let's suppose speaker A and speaker B are at speakers corner in Hyde Park
> 
> Speaker B is moved on, or even detained because the opinions expressed are *deemed* offensive ( but not illegal).
> 
> ...



What was unlawful?


----------



## wayneL (7 January 2021)

rederob said:


> What was unlawful?



Nothing.

And that is the point.


----------



## wayneL (7 January 2021)

In this instance, free speech was preserved after intervention, but such is not always the case.









						Google restored TalkRadio's YouTube channel when UK intervened
					

Google terminated TalkRadio's YouTube account amid claims the News UK-owned broadcaster 'violated' the website's 'community guidelines' by airing criticism of lockdowns.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Snip: *Google restores TalkRadio's YouTube channel in dramatic U-turn when UK ministers intervened - less than 24 hours after it sparked freedom of speech row by axing station's account 'for airing anti-lockdown views'*


----------



## rederob (7 January 2021)

wayneL said:


> Nothing.
> 
> And that is the point.



If the person being moved on had a right to say what they did, then the action of moving-on the speaker was unlawful.
Your Google example related to the actions of carriage services to act as they saw fit and is not a matter of "free speech."


----------



## wayneL (7 January 2021)

rederob said:


> If the person being moved on had a right to say what they did, then the action of moving-on the speaker was unlawful.
> Your Google example related to the actions of carriage services to act as they saw fit and is not a matter of "free speech."



Carriage service...
Smoke signals?
Morse?
Telegraph?
Telephone?
Forums?
IRC?
Facebook?
Twitter?

Publisher Vs platform?

I won't belabour the point any further, but you may be able to join the dots; if you want to.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 January 2021)

rederob said:


> If the person being moved on had a right to say what they did, then the action of moving-on the speaker was unlawful.
> Your Google example related to the actions of carriage services to act as they saw fit and is not a matter of "free speech."




Denial of free speech doesn't have to be blatant. 

The ABC did it pretty well during the SSM debate when it had ONE interview with Lyle Shelton on the anti side and hundreds of others bashing the pro side.

That was pretty blatant come to think of it.


----------



## rederob (7 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Denial of free speech doesn't have to be blatant.
> 
> The ABC did it pretty well during the SSM debate when it had ONE interview with Lyle Shelton on the anti side and hundreds of others bashing the pro side.
> 
> That was pretty blatant come to think of it.



You and @wayneL are confusing the role of carriage services with the notion of "free speech."
What were the legal prohibitions to the debate or speakers?


----------



## SirRumpole (7 January 2021)

rederob said:


> You and @wayneL are confusing the role of carriage services with the notion of "free speech."
> What were the legal prohibitions to the debate or speakers?





Legalities are one thing. No one broke any laws. It's a matter of our national broadcaster being unbiased and not taking a position on a certain issue.

Freedom of speech depends on how big your megaphone is.


----------



## rederob (7 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Legalities are one thing. No one broke any laws. It's a matter of our national broadcaster being unbiased and not taking a position on a certain issue.
> 
> Freedom of speech depends on how big your megaphone is.



Again, you are not talking about freedom of speech but, instead, about the role the media plays.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 January 2021)

rederob said:


> Again, you are not talking about freedom of speech but, instead, about the role the media plays.




Yes, because they are related. If the media reports only one side they are in effect denying freedom of speech to the other side.


----------



## rederob (7 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, because they are related. If the media reports only one side they are in effect denying freedom of speech to the other side.



Not so as that falls under *media bias*, which is a different concept.  
Unless you are preventing a person from actually making a statement then their freedoms are preserved.


----------



## wayneL (7 January 2021)

rederob said:


> You and @wayneL are confusing the role of carriage services with the notion of "free speech."
> What were the legal prohibitions to the debate or speakers?



That's why I describe it as a grey area.

"*Freedom of speech*[2] is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction.”

Censorship is rife all across the west and social media is instrumental (Vis a vis the "platform" argument) in that. 

Apart from that:

In the UK there are rather large squads of police trawling social media looking for posts which may offend the prevailing ideology. These are investigated, recorded as "non crime hate speech" and goes on a person's record.... which may disqualify them from employment in certain fields. No crime committed, yet because some snowflake complained, or some indoctrinated rozzer didn't like it, the end up with a blot on their record.

Scotland is passing some pretty Draconian legislation.

Mark Meecham was arrested and charged for a joke on YouTube. Then there was the egregious use of incitement laws down in Ballarat to terrorise and arrest a pregnant woman.

Then there is Bill c16 in Canada.

It's a slippery slope unless some protections are in place such as the US' 1st amendment, Rob. Free speech has disappeared in the near past in the west, and it can happen again unless we are proactive.


----------



## sptrawler (7 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Legalities are one thing. No one broke any laws. It's a matter of our national broadcaster being unbiased and not taking a position on a certain issue.
> 
> Freedom of speech depends on how big your megaphone is.



Or in the case of the ABC, who is paying for it, the media has every right to be biased as it obviously is, in the case of Fairfax Vs Murdoch, however the ABC doesn't fall in the same category.
As it is funded by all taxpayers, it has an obligation to equally represent all sides of the debate, in a balanced and unbiased way.
Where the ABC falls short on several occasions, is where they don't allow speakers the opportunity to access the platform, to voice an opposing opinion e.g stacked audiences and panels.


----------



## rederob (7 January 2021)

wayneL said:


> That's why I describe it as a grey area.
> 
> "*Freedom of speech*[2] is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction.”
> 
> ...



All you are doing is describing the actions of carriage services and the media generally.
Nothing requires that they "carry" or amplify or otherwise present a message.  Those "rights" do not exist.
Despite me asking many times you cannot show that a speaker cannot make a statement within the constraints of law.


----------



## sptrawler (7 January 2021)

wayneL said:


> That's why I describe it as a grey area.
> 
> "*Freedom of speech*[2] is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction.”
> 
> ...



I guess 'twitter' locking out Trump from accessing their platform, isn't about free speech, it is about censorship which really is about stopping people from being allowed to voice their opinion.









						Twitter says Trump’s account is locked, and he’s facing a ban
					

It says the risk of harm is greater than the news value.




					www.theverge.com
				



From the article:
_Twitter is locking President Donald Trump’s account for 12 hours after removing three tweets that contained “repeated and severe violations” of its civic integrity policy. It says the account will be permanently suspended if violations continue, and it will not be unlocked unless Trump entirely deletes the three offending tweets_.

Apparently the offending tweets were:

_The change of policy came after a series of tweets in which Mr Trump appeared to endorse the rioters who stormed the Capitol Building in support of the president. 
In the posts, Mr Trump asked those involved to go home but called them “very special” and said “we love you”. He also repeated his false claim that he won the election_.
_Now the company says that the president’s account will be locked and it could be suspended entirely if he continues to break the rules_.









						Twitter and Facebook lock Donald Trump’s account
					

President repeated false claims of election victory and told rioters he loved them




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## wayneL (7 January 2021)

rederob said:


> All you are doing is describing the actions of carriage services and the media generally.
> Nothing requires that they "carry" or amplify or otherwise present a message.  Those "rights" do not exist.
> Despite me asking many times you cannot show that a speaker cannot make a statement within the constraints of law.



The law is the problem mate, both implicitly and increasingly explicitly.


----------



## dutchie (7 January 2021)

Twitter is denying The President of the USA his freedom of speech.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 January 2021)

dutchie said:


> Twitter is denying The President of the USA his freedom of speech.




Yeah they shouldn't do that.

It just turns him into a martyr.

Let him say what he wants, then show that it's bullshite.


----------



## dutchie (7 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Yeah they shouldn't do that.
> 
> It just turns him into a martyr.
> 
> Let him say what he wants, then show that it's bullshite.



No you don't have to show it. Just say it.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 January 2021)

dutchie said:


> No you don't have to show it. Just say it.




The Supreme Court has shown it.


----------



## bellenuit (7 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Yeah they shouldn't do that.
> 
> It just turns him into a martyr.
> 
> Let him say what he wants, then show that it's bullshite.




The trouble is what he wants to say is to tell his supporters to rise up and forcefully take over government so that he can stay in power. 

Nobody is curtailing his freedom of speech. He can say what he wants, but no one is required to give him a platform to say it on. IMO, it is akin to demanding the right to stand on the window balcony of a prominently located hotel and speak to the crowds below, even if he has paid for the room. A hotel is not Speakers Corner and preventing such a speech is not denying free speech.


----------



## moXJO (7 January 2021)

bellenuit said:


> The trouble is what he wants to say is to tell his supporters to rise up and forcefully take over government so that he can stay in power.
> 
> Nobody is curtailing his freedom of speech. He can say what he wants, but no one is required to give him a platform to say it on. IMO, it is akin to demanding the right to stand on the window balcony of a prominently located hotel and speak to the crowds below, even if he has paid for the room. A hotel is not Speakers Corner and preventing such a speech is not denying free speech.



Can you link the tweet?
I didn't see that one.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 January 2021)

bellenuit said:


> The trouble is what he wants to say is to tell his supporters to rise up and forcefully take over government so that he can stay in power.




Well that's basically treason, so give him enough rope and he'll hang himself.


----------



## bellenuit (7 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Well that's basically treason, so give him enough rope and he'll hang himself.




All well and good if his attempt at a coup fails. But if he succeeds, he will be the one doing the hanging. Too late then, so that is why he should not be given a platform now.


----------



## bellenuit (7 January 2021)

moXJO said:


> Can you link the tweet?
> I didn't see that one.




That's because he is barred from twitter. If you don't understand what he is up to, then nothing I can do about it. He has been setting the stage for this for several months now. If I remember correctly, weren't you the one that said last week that it was all bluff and there would be no issues when it came to confirming Biden as president?


----------



## SirRumpole (7 January 2021)

bellenuit said:


> All well and good if his attempt at a coup fails. But if he succeeds, he will be the one doing the hanging. Too late then, so that is why he should not be given a platform now.




No way will a "coup" of a few renegades succeed.

Trump is so delusional he thinks he controls a Confederate army.

The National Guard will throw him out because they defend the Constitution.


----------



## moXJO (7 January 2021)

bellenuit said:


> That's because he is barred from twitter. If you don't understand what he is up to, then nothing I can do about it. He has been setting the stage for this for several months now. If I remember correctly, weren't you the one that said last week that it was all bluff and there would be no issues when it came to confirming Biden as president?




Im well aware. But all sides have stoked tensions. However someone was claiming he emphasised "peaceful protest". So yeah I want to see it.


----------



## moXJO (7 January 2021)

bellenuit said:


> be no issues when it came to confirming Biden as president?



I said that Biden would become prez without  incident. Thats 14ish days away. 
Protests are hardly an issue or going to change the outcome.


----------



## bellenuit (7 January 2021)

moXJO said:


> However someone was claiming he emphasised "peaceful protest".




Melania doesn't count.


----------



## moXJO (7 January 2021)

bellenuit said:


> Melania doesn't count.



Either way I haven't read his twitter that points one way or the other.


----------



## bellenuit (7 January 2021)

moXJO said:


> Either way I haven't read his twitter that points one way or the other.




Well here's a quote from a video:

“I know your pain, I know your hurt,” Trump said in the video. “We had an election that was stolen from us. It was a landslide election and everyone knows it, especially the other side.”

“We have to have peace,” added the president. “So go home. *We love you. You’re very special*."









						Trump's tweets in praise of Capitol rioters blocked by Facebook and Twitter
					

The president's Twitter account was suspended for 12 hours after he told supporters who stormed the Capitol "We love you. You're very special" while spreading election misinformation.




					news.yahoo.com


----------



## IFocus (7 January 2021)

South American politics  arrives in Washington DC via Trump.

This is all straight out of messy south of the boarder stuff that happen 40 years ago its all quite bizarre.

Unless you are a Trump supporter.


----------



## bellenuit (7 January 2021)

*We love you. You're very special.*


----------



## bellenuit (7 January 2021)

A very dangerous time.


----------



## Smurf1976 (8 January 2021)

I'm sure that somewhere on this forum I've mentioned narcissists, narcissistic rage and how to set these people off.

That's not saying "I was right" but rather that all this is classic behaviour, it's straight out of the textbook as to what they do.

Push them far enough and they're rather dangerous yes. I mean seriously, really dangerous.


----------



## bellenuit (8 January 2021)

A bit too late now that the horse has bolted.


----------



## moXJO (8 January 2021)

bellenuit said:


> Well here's a quote from a video:
> 
> “I know your pain, I know your hurt,” Trump said in the video. “We had an election that was stolen from us. It was a landslide election and everyone knows it, especially the other side.”
> 
> ...



 Obviously a message of violence. Browsing around, this demonstration was planned weeks ago.


----------



## basilio (8 January 2021)

The timeline of Trumps planning and promotion of the insurrection at the Congress.









						Incitement: a timeline of Trump's inflammatory rhetoric before the Capitol riot
					

The president, his family and his allies made no shortage of disturbing remarks in the run-up t0 Wednesday’s siege




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## dutchie (8 January 2021)

bellenuit said:


> A bit too late now that the horse has bolted.
> 
> View attachment 117950



Big Tech is censoring people. Yay

or more specifically, 
Big Tech is censoring people we don't like. Yay


----------



## wayneL (8 January 2021)

dutchie said:


> Big Tech is censoring people. Yay
> 
> or more specifically,
> Big Tech is censoring people we don't like. Yay



It's a "Brave New World", Dutchie.


----------



## dutchie (8 January 2021)

dutchie said:


> Big Tech is censoring people. Yay
> 
> or more specifically,
> Big Tech is censoring people we don't like. Yay


----------



## Smurf1976 (8 January 2021)

dutchie said:


> Big Tech is censoring people. Yay
> 
> or more specifically,
> Big Tech is censoring people we don't like. Yay



That and Trump are both very serious problems.

If anyone doubts the value of free speech and why it should prevail regardless of the message then they need to look no further than the outcome of the US elections to see that yes, people can think and no, there’s no need to gag those we disagree with.

That said, inciting violence is one case where censorship arguably is justified so long as it’s applied without bias as to who is being censored.


----------



## rederob (8 January 2021)

Smurf1976 said:


> That and Trump are both very serious problems.
> 
> If anyone doubts the value of free speech and why it should prevail regardless of the message then they need to look no further than the outcome of the US elections to see that yes, people can think and no, there’s no need to gag those we disagree with.
> 
> That said, inciting violence is one case where censorship arguably is justified so long as it’s applied without bias as to who is being censored.



Big Tech happen also to be corporations you can invest in.  And corporations have a social responsibility aside from a commercial imperative.  That social responsibility should include not giving oxygen to commentary that is inciteful or damaging.
Providing platforms for fascists, liars or lunatics to peddle their stock in trade makes no sense from a societal perspective, although Fox certainly worked out how it could be commercialised.  And Trump worked out how to "weaponise" it from a political perspective. 
Yesterday was a culmination of years of working the media whereby Trump planted the seeds, collected the dead wood, poured over petrol, lit the match and hope for the best.  
Even after the calamity that occurred within the Capitol building earlier yesterday, over 100 Republican members of Congress continued to support the lies Trump spouted about the stolen election and voted against certifying the will of the people in several States.  That's what happens when free speech is allowed to be weaponised.  America is now left a divided nation because their right to lie with impunity has consequences.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 January 2021)

rederob said:


> Big Tech happen also to be corporations you can invest in.  And corporations have a social responsibility aside from a commercial imperative.  That social responsibility should include not giving oxygen to commentary that is inciteful or damaging.
> Providing platforms for fascists, liars or lunatics to peddle their stock in trade makes no sense from a societal perspective, although Fox certainly worked out how it could be commercialised.  And Trump worked out how to "weaponise" it from a political perspective.
> Yesterday was a culmination of years of working the media whereby Trump planted the seeds, collected the dead wood, poured over petrol, lit the match and hope for the best.
> Even after the calamity that occurred within the Capitol building earlier yesterday, over 100 Republican members of Congress continued to support the lies Trump spouted about the stolen election and voted against certifying the will of the people in several States.  That's what happens when free speech is allowed to be weaponised.  America is now left a divided nation because their right to lie with impunity has consequences.




in my view people who lie are worse off when their lies are publicly exposed rather than just being stifled.

As I said before, censoring them makes them look like martyrs and fuels suspicions they they are being silenced by the 'elites' or 'communists' or <fill in your repressive group of choice>.

It's better to have the loonies out in the open where they can be seen rather than bubbling under the surface.


----------



## moXJO (8 January 2021)

rederob said:


> Big Tech happen also to be corporations you can invest in.  And corporations have a social responsibility aside from a commercial imperative.  That social responsibility should include not giving oxygen to commentary that is inciteful or damaging.
> Providing platforms for fascists, liars or lunatics to peddle their stock in trade makes no sense from a societal perspective, although Fox certainly worked out how it could be commercialised.  And Trump worked out how to "weaponise" it from a political perspective.
> Yesterday was a culmination of years of working the media whereby Trump planted the seeds, collected the dead wood, poured over petrol, lit the match and hope for the best.
> Even after the calamity that occurred within the Capitol building earlier yesterday, over 100 Republican members of Congress continued to support the lies Trump spouted about the stolen election and voted against certifying the will of the people in several States.  That's what happens when free speech is allowed to be weaponised.  America is now left a divided nation because their right to lie with impunity has consequences.



We have had cities burned and looted that included court houses and federal buildings, people killed and businesses destroyed all by ongoing riots. These affect actual people.

Or we had the people take it to the government yesterday and voice their displeasure at what happened this election. 

So everyone can spare me the moral outrage.
The funniest thing is that Trump brought in the 10 years mandatory sentencing for damages to federal buildings. So  these guys are going to jail.


----------



## dutchie (8 January 2021)

moXJO said:


> We have had cities burned and looted that included court houses and federal buildings, people killed and businesses destroyed all by ongoing riots. These affect actual people.



The instigators of those riots and the violence -the big fascist group Antifa and the racist BLM - according to Joe, is just an idea, so it's OK



moXJO said:


> So everyone can spare me the moral outrage.



So many hypocrites here.


----------



## rederob (8 January 2021)

moXJO said:


> We have had cities burned and looted that included court houses and federal buildings, people killed and businesses destroyed all by ongoing riots. These affect actual people.
> 
> Or we had the people take it to the government yesterday and voice their displeasure at what happened this election.
> 
> ...



The topic is "Freedom of Speech."
The President told his supporters to go to the Capitol building after months fomenting their anger with a cascade of lies.
This is not about _*moral outrage*_ but, instead, is the culmination of a relentless attack on the bastions of democracy that ultimately led to the killing of a person who was trying to break into the barricaded House of Representatives.  
Find a precedent if you can!


----------



## dutchie (8 January 2021)

rederob said:


> This is not about _*moral outrage*_ but, instead, is the culmination of a relentless attack on the bastions of democracy
> Find a precedent if you can!



Is that similar to the unrelenting attack on the bastions of democracy perpetrated on the elected President of the USA which went on for over 4 years, and started before he was actually inaugurated. Or are you just a hypocrite?


----------



## IFocus (8 January 2021)

rederob said:


> The topic is "Freedom of Speech."
> The President told his supporters to go to the Capitol building after months fomenting their anger with a cascade of lies.
> This is not about _*moral outrage*_ but, instead, is the culmination of a relentless attack on the bastions of democracy that ultimately led to the killing of a person who was trying to break into the barricaded House of Representatives.
> Find a precedent if you can!





Exactly, Trump (remember is the President of the USA) and his children, lawyer and sycophant senators / congressmen  exercised their freedom of speech by inciting a collection of fringe elements to attack the centre of federal democratic rule in the USA based on a fraud.

 Putin who has tried for so long to get the same result using the same means can be heard cheering in the back ground for Trump using his modus operandi.

Who needs enemy's when you have Trump to sow division?


----------



## bellenuit (8 January 2021)

dutchie said:


> Is that similar to the unrelenting attack on the bastions of democracy perpetrated on the elected President of the USA which went on for over 4 years, and started before he was actually inaugurated. Or are you just a hypocrite?




Yes. They were a lot smarter than you lot and could see what he was long before he took office. You guys can't even work it out after what happened in DC two days ago.


----------



## dutchie (8 January 2021)

bellenuit said:


> Yes. They were a lot smarter than you lot and could see what he was long before he took office. You guys can't even work it out after what happened in DC two days ago.



LOL


----------



## wayneL (8 January 2021)

This thread is comedy gold.


bellenuit said:


> Yes. They were a lot smarter than you lot and could see what he was long before he took office. You guys can't even work it out after what happened in DC two days ago.



Comedic.

Sow to the wind, reap a whirlwind bro.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 January 2021)

wayneL said:


> Sow to the wind, reap a whirlwind bro.




Tell it to Trump.


----------



## wayneL (8 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Tell it to Trump.




We'll see... and revisit this at the appropriate time.


----------



## dutchie (9 January 2021)

Google, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube will censor more and more.


----------



## dutchie (9 January 2021)

dutchie said:


> Google, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube will censor more and more.



and Apple.


----------



## dutchie (9 January 2021)

Facebook has just banned #Walkaway.
#WalkAway is a massive movement for those who left the democrat party. 

This should tell you where we are headed.


----------



## moXJO (9 January 2021)

rederob said:


> The topic is "Freedom of Speech."
> The President told his supporters to go to the Capitol building after months fomenting their anger with a cascade of lies.
> This is not about _*moral outrage*_ but, instead, is the culmination of a relentless attack on the bastions of democracy that ultimately led to the killing of a person who was trying to break into the barricaded House of Representatives.
> Find a precedent if you can!




Democrats directly encouraged riots that caused hundreds of millions in damages to cities. They have lied along with the media that has fuelled leftist riots that have continued for months. This had more to do with the current mood of the right. Along with the media dishing out crap. This is what started this crap. Along with all the conspiracies up to this point. And you guys posted about a hundred pages worth.

He told them to go to the capital and what?
Violent protest has been part of the US for a long time. Where did he say "I command you to destroy". Oh it was loaded language?
You mean the kind Democrat senators and house members have been using for months?

And the person that was shot in the neck. If it were the left it would be outrage at the way it was done. Instead I saw open celebration. And it is that which caused this riot. Cancel culture, vilification of guys like peterson or moderate right, Hollywood bs, media attacks and the mail in voting was the final straw.

But tell me it was Trump. Not the fact that the left just picked at the conservatives till everyone's hate boiled over. 






They were not treated with kid gloves as has been suggested elsewhere.


----------



## rederob (9 January 2021)

moXJO said:


> Democrats directly encouraged riots that caused hundreds of millions in damages to cities. They have lied along with the media that has fuelled leftist riots that have continued for months. This had more to do with the current mood of the right. Along with the media dishing out crap. This is what started this crap. Along with all the conspiracies up to this point. And you guys posted about a hundred pages worth.
> 
> He told them to go to the capital and what?
> Violent protest has been part of the US for a long time. Where did he say "I command you to destroy". Oh it was loaded language?
> ...



Perhaps you can provide evidence for your claims, which I know to be baseless opinion.
The contrary position to yours has a President who has been *proven* to lie, mislead or deceive over 25000 times.
As @basilio has recently pointed out, Trump's closest allies are now abandoning him.  Meanwhile, the majority of his handpicked appointments to the Whitehouse are now exposing Trump's true nature, and it's not a picture of a person who had the ability to lead America.


----------



## moXJO (9 January 2021)

rederob said:


> Perhaps you can provide evidence for your claims, which I know to be baseless opinion.
> The contrary position to yours has a President who has been *proven* to lie, mislead or deceive over 25000 times.
> As @basilio has recently pointed out, Trump's closest allies are now abandoning him.  Meanwhile, the majority of his handpicked appointments to the Whitehouse are now exposing Trump's true nature, and it's not a picture of a person who had the ability to lead America.



Perhaps you can google the ones who did it yourself instead of relying on me to clue you in.
It was always about the change and he indeed brought the most.


----------



## basilio (9 January 2021)

moXJO said:


> It was always about the change and he indeed brought the most.




Indeed he has.. He has turned lying into an art form to the point that 10's of millions of people believe the most insane nonsense *just because he says it.  No evidence required.  *The latest most poisonous example is his insistence that he won the last election  and it was stolen from him.

In any case the Fat Lady hasn't started to sing yet.  Seems like the 6th of January stll into the Capitol was just the warm up to the real deal Moxjo.  But given your close following of all the various sites that spread this stuff you'd be on top of it.















						Twitter permanently suspends Trump's account, citing risk of 'further incitement of violence' – as it happened
					

President barred over repeated violation of platform rules as House plans articles of impeachment




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## dutchie (9 January 2021)

Well it seems 1984 came earlier than I thought it would.

I hope everyone has been earning their social credit points.


----------



## satanoperca (9 January 2021)

dutchie said:


> Well it seems 1984 came earlier than I thought it would.
> 
> I hope everyone has been earning their social credit points.




I have some spare tin foil if you need it!


----------



## satanoperca (9 January 2021)

Oh for those that are fainthearted do not click on this
Why really happened.


----------



## dutchie (9 January 2021)

The new corporate authoritarian liberal-left monoculture is going to be absolutely ruthless -- and in 12 days it is merging with the state.
This only the beginning. 

(Michael Tracey)


----------



## Knobby22 (9 January 2021)

dutchie said:


> The new corporate authoritarian liberal-left monoculture is going to be absolutely ruthless -- and in 12 days it is merging with the state.
> This only the beginning.
> 
> (Michael Tracey)



What a load of crap.
Suppose we need a fascist government to stop them. I am sick of these conspiracy theories when we see the reality happen in front of us and these sheep just obey.
Right wing thugs with vans fill of Molotov cocktails, policeman killed, politicians shot in the head, threatened.
Just shut up. Have enough of this extremists crap  Hang around with your mates on some other website.

Ronald Reagan would be disgusted


----------



## dutchie (9 January 2021)

Knobby22 said:


> What a load of crap.
> Suppose we need a fascist government to stop them. I am sick of these conspiracy theories when we see the reality happen in front of us and these sheep just obey.
> Right wing thugs with vans fill of Molotov cocktails, policeman killed, politicians shot in the head, threatened.
> Just shut up. Have enough of this extremists crap  Hang around with your mates on some other website.
> ...



I don't agree with you - quick shut me up. Typical of the left.


----------



## satanoperca (9 January 2021)

Knobby22 said:


> What a load of crap.
> Suppose we need a fascist government to stop them. I am sick of these conspiracy theories when we see the reality happen in front of us and these sheep just obey.
> Right wing thugs with vans fill of Molotov cocktails, policeman killed, politicians shot in the head, threatened.
> Just shut up. Have enough of this extremists crap  Hang around with your mates on some other website.
> ...



Just ignore him, it is easier, nuttiers are everywhere, including presidents.


----------



## dutchie (9 January 2021)

satanoperca said:


> Just ignore him



That would be nice.


----------



## sptrawler (9 January 2021)

rederob said:


> The topic is "Freedom of Speech."
> The President told his supporters to go to the Capitol building after months fomenting their anger with a cascade of lies.
> This is not about _*moral outrage*_ but, instead, is the culmination of a relentless attack on the bastions of democracy that ultimately led to the killing of a person who was trying to break into the barricaded House of Representatives.
> Find a precedent if you can!



Well you could go back to the 1960's and the shooting of demonstrating students, just saying, it does fit in the free speech thread. 









						Kent State shootings - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## dutchie (9 January 2021)

CNN trying to destroy Fox News.


----------



## Knobby22 (9 January 2021)

Freedom is never more than one generation from extinction. It must be fought for and defended by each generation.  Ronald Reagan.

I am not going to stand by anymore.


----------



## moXJO (9 January 2021)

basilio said:


> Indeed he has.. He has turned lying into an art form to the point that 10's of millions of people believe the most insane nonsense *just because he says it.  No evidence required.  *The latest most poisonous example is his insistence that he won the last election  and it was stolen from him.
> 
> In any case the Fat Lady hasn't started to sing yet.  Seems like the 6th of January stll into the Capitol was just the warm up to the real deal Moxjo.  But given your close following of all the various sites that spread this stuff you'd be on top of it.
> 
> ...



When he is gone it will be over. Both sides will continue to hate one another though.  I post videos from across Twitter of things that actually happen. You have been posting a bunch of sht mixed with truths for the last 4 years.
Continually....


----------



## satanoperca (9 January 2021)

dutchie said:


> That would be nice.



Our freedoms allow that.


----------



## sptrawler (9 January 2021)

Freedom is being allowed to hear the uncensored version of what someone has to say, then making your own mind up on what it means.
Freedom isn't parroting, what the media decides to tell you was said, that is being a Muppet.
Way too much of that happening on all fronts at the moment, but as Joh said, you have to feed the chooks.
Just my opinion


----------



## sptrawler (10 January 2021)

Like I said a while ago, Boris Johnson next, then Morrison will be in the cross hairs, it is so predictable IMO.


----------



## rederob (10 January 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Freedom is being allowed to hear the uncensored version of what someone has to say, then making your own mind up on what it means.
> Freedom isn't parroting, what the media decides to tell you was said, that is being a Muppet.
> Way too much of that happening on all fronts at the moment, but as Joh said, you have to feed the chooks.
> Just my opinion



That really worked well in America.
One person's freedom led to other peoples deaths, all in the name of freedom.
Not my opinion.


----------



## orr (10 January 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Freedom is being allowed to hear the uncensored version of what someone has to say, then making your own mind up on what it means.
> Freedom isn't parroting, what the media decides to tell you was said, that is being a Muppet.
> Way too much of that happening on all fronts at the moment, but as Joh said, you have to feed the chooks.
> Just my opinion




You might want to make the effort to find out a little bit about a Oliver Wendall Holmes. He's a fella with an 'opinion' a lot more thought out and valid in the circumstances than yours...

Babbitt died, shot in the neck, a few days back with a firm belief that satan worshiping child rapists are about to be put in charge of  Government of her country.
'the media told her so'....And was led to riot becuase of it (see below). And she drank deep at the font of Murdoch's Fox disinformation outlet.
And then there's 'muppets' like me who also get information from 'the media' and experts and books And then look for counter arguments, who for what ever reason arn't  delusional 'bustard arse' pool cleaners.

"
*"Shouting fire in a crowded theater"*_ is a popular analogy for speech or actions made for the principal purpose of creating panic. The phrase is a paraphrasing of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.'s opinion in the United States Supreme Court case Schenck v. United States in 1919, which held that the defendant's speech in opposition to the draft during World War I was not protected free speech under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. The case was later partially overturned by Brandenburg v. Ohio in 1969, *which limited the scope of banned speech to that which would be directed to and likely to incite imminent lawless action (e.g. a riot).**[1]*

The paraphrasing differs from Holmes's original wording in that it typically does not include the word falsely, while also adding the word "crowded" to describe the theatre.[2] The original wording used in Holmes's opinion ("falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic") highlights that speech that is dangerous and false is not protected, as opposed to speech that is dangerous but also true._"


just his Opinion?


----------



## DB008 (10 January 2021)

Twitter has now banned Trump (his personal account) and a few others.

Facebook has also banned Trump

Apple and Google have both taken down Parler in the last 24 hours. Parler is also hosted on AWS, only a matter of time before Parler gets the boot.

Free speech, not in the USA.

Big tech is now telling you what to think.

More pictures of Hunter Biden have also been leaked - and it involves underage children. Disgusting. That pedofile should be locked up - but l'm sure big tech will try to sweep it all under the carpet.


----------



## The Triangle (10 January 2021)

USA never had 'free' speech.  It has always been under control of the localized outrage mob where you have to talk and think like the mainstream or else you're labeled and treated like a leper - always has been always will be that way.  

Good series of tweets by Navalny about the topic of trumps twitter and freedom of speech.  

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">2. Of course, during his time in the office, Trump has been writing and saying very irresponsible things. And paid for it by not getting re-elected for a second term.</p>&mdash; Alexey Navalny (@navalny) <a href="">January 9, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


----------



## SirRumpole (10 January 2021)

DB008 said:


> More pictures of Hunter Biden have also been leaked - and it involves underage children. Disgusting. That pedofile should be locked up - but l'm sure big tech will try to sweep it all under the carpet.




More unsubstantiated rumours ?

You need to provide some links if you throw stuff like that around.


----------



## sptrawler (10 January 2021)

orr said:


> You might want to make the effort to find out a little bit about a Oliver Wendall Holmes. He's a fella with an 'opinion' a lot more thought out and valid in the circumstances than yours...



That's a very hurtful thing to say, when you know nothing of my circumstances, but the comment is to be expected coming from yourself. 
I guess I could expect to find you at the head of the mob, but then that is an assumption on my part, you may well be a very nice person. 😂


----------



## sptrawler (10 January 2021)

rederob said:


> One person's freedom led to other peoples deaths, all in the name of freedom.



History is littered with examples of that.


----------



## wayneL (10 January 2021)

The Triangle said:


> USA never had 'free' speech.  It has always been under control of the localized outrage mob where you have to talk and think like the mainstream or else you're labeled and treated like a leper - always has been always will be that way.
> 
> Good series of tweets by Navalny about the topic of trumps twitter and freedom of speech.
> 
> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">2. Of course, during his time in the office, Trump has been writing and saying very irresponsible things. And paid for it by not getting re-elected for a second term.</p>&mdash; Alexey Navalny (@navalny) <a href="">January 9, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>




To repeat what has been pointed out a million times, free speech does not, and should not, absolve anybody of the consequences of that speech.

Anyone with a wife who asks "does my @ss look big in this" know that very acutely LOL.

However, there should be no legal or regulatory impediment, whether by government or corporation ('cept for incitement to violence etc).

The freedom to offend should be sacrosanct, as should the lawful consequences.


----------



## rederob (10 January 2021)

sptrawler said:


> History is littered with examples of that.



When did a leader of a democracy last lie to Trump's extent and then incite the masses to overturn an election simply because he was able to abuse the rights afforded to him by the media?


----------



## sptrawler (10 January 2021)

You said: _One persons freedom, led to another persons death, in the name of freedom_.
Most wars are fought by people who have no say in whether they live or die and are sent there by people who are free, due to those who go dying for them.
So now the media has the right to decide what is right, that certainly underpins a lot of peoples beliefs and becomes a case of positive reinforcement for them.


----------



## rederob (10 January 2021)

sptrawler said:


> You said: _One persons freedom, led to another persons death, in the name of freedom_.
> Most wars are fought by people who have no say in whether they live or die and are sent there by people who are free, due to those who go dying for them.
> So now the media has the right to decide what is right, that certainly underpins a lot of peoples beliefs and becomes a case of positive reinforcement for them.



This thread is about "*free speech*."
The consequences of Trump's freedom played out last week.
Trump abused the privilege granted to him by the media and not many are surprised by the outcome.
The media has no role in what you believe: what you believe is* what you choose to believe* from your experience, and more often than not is based on *who *is providing the source information rather than the platform/medium delivering it.
In terms of "reinforcement," if you only look for sources that confirm what you have chosen to believe, then you get all the reinforcement you need.  I view a fair bit of Fox, QAnon and Newsmax and am impressed with their inability to be logical or evidentiary in what they present.
Next, as @Joe Blow will attest, you cannot afford to keep giving oxygen to platform users who damage your commercial base.  You might call this censorship but it's just a necessary business decision.  In the banking industry a similar pressure is being applied in relation to lending for coal-based projects.  In the advertising industry it's far more cut throat.
As individuals we can have opinions on most things.  However, when *expressing *our opinions we must be respectful of the rights and reputation of others (slander/libel laws), and be mindful of laws relating to matters such as national security, public order or morality.  And despite @wayneL's belief, we have *no *right to universally "offend" others.
If you think you have a case for stepping outside our laws relating to "expression," there is a process through the legislature.

Most of this thread is about the medium or carriage service granted to "expression."  Or about the biased nature of publishers in presenting, amplifying or altering "expression."  As Trump has found out, nobody has a right that their "expression" is carried beyond the eyes or ears of where it occurred.  This latter point is too often confused with "free speech."


----------



## SirRumpole (10 January 2021)

rederob said:


> Next, as @Joe Blow will attest, you cannot afford to keep giving oxygen to platform users who damage your commercial base.




I'd say Trump's twitter had one of the biggest audiences. People who say provocative things usually attract a lot of hangers on keen to read the next absurdity.

The fact that a lot of people believe his tripe and that of QAnon is testament to the poor state of the education system in the US. 

Why do you read Qanon when it is such rubbish ? Surely it should be "cancelled" as well ?


----------



## sptrawler (10 January 2021)

rederob said:


> This thread is about "*free speech*."
> The consequences of Trump's freedom played out last week.
> Trump abused the privilege granted to him by the media and not many are surprised by the outcome.
> The media has no role in what you believe: what you believe is* what you choose to believe* from your experience, and more often than not is based on *who *is providing the source information rather than the platform/medium delivering it.
> ...



Firstly the media broadcasting anything isn't a privilege, it is based on a commercial decision or a regulatory requirement, if it is a private broadcaster they make a decision on whether they think it will appeal to their audience. That isn't a privilege, unless you are a needy person and will pay them to give you air time.
Publicly funded media have a specific set of obligations, that they have to adhere to, this is to ensure impartiality and an objective presentation.

The media has a lot of influence on public opinion, if it didn't companies, politicians etc wouldn't pay money to advertise and or appeal to the public for their custom or vote.

In terms of "reinforcement", I think you prove my point, by highlighting media that has differing opinion to yours.

I agree regarding censorship, there should actually be more of it, it should be independent impartial and cover all media.

Absolutely agree that respect should be shown when responding to others, people have a right to their beliefs, if someone disagrees with them state the case. I haven't seen many arguments that result in one person changing their stance, usually either one walks away, or the argument escalates and then becomes problematic.

When publishers have carte blanche to self regulate and censor, it obviously leads to a situation where corruption and or political manipulation can occur, a large proportion of the population rely on the media to give them correct, accurate and unadulterated information.
From what you seem to indicate, that is actually optional, I think that is a very dangerous paradigm but one I'm very sure many would wish for ala an investigation into newscorp rather than the media.


----------



## wayneL (10 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> I'd say Trump's twitter had one of the biggest audiences. People who say provocative things usually attract a lot of hangers on keen to read the next absurdity.
> 
> The fact that a lot of people believe his tripe and that of QAnon is testament to the poor state of the education system in the US.
> 
> Why do you read Qanon when it is such rubbish ? Surely it should be "cancelled" as well ?



Could the same be said of Marx, Mao, Foucault, Epicurus, and a host of others?

How about Hillary?

How about Biden, the new liar in chief? Already the double standards are extraordinarily toxic and divisive.

Be careful man, the sort of society you seem to want to facilitate will not be good for anyone, in the end.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 January 2021)

wayneL said:


> Be careful man, the sort of society you seem to want to facilitate will not be good for anyone, in the end.




So you are arguing for censorship, or being cynical ?

Name a few Biden lies just to make sure you are not spreading fake news.


----------



## wayneL (10 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> So you are arguing for censorship, or being cynical ?
> 
> Name a few Biden lies just to make sure you are not spreading fake news.



In what universe are you arguing that I am for censorship?

WTF?


----------



## SirRumpole (10 January 2021)

wayneL said:


> In what universe are you arguing that I am for censorship?
> 
> WTF?




So what did you mean by the comment "the world I want to facilitate" ? What world is that in your opinion ?

I've said before that I believe bullshite should be out there in order to be rebutted, not shoved into a corner.

What do you think ?


----------



## wayneL (10 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> So what did you mean by the comment "the world I want to facilitate" ? What world is that in your opinion ?
> 
> I've said before that I believe bullshite should be out there in order to be rebutted, not shoved into a corner.
> 
> What do you think ?



Clearly you believe, as evidenced by your comment, that Joey is some font of truth. You even asked me to provide evidence of his lies, without undertaking even some basic research yourself.

The world you facilitate is one where your own ideologues go unquestioned, as they usher in a new dystopia.

Congrats.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 January 2021)

wayneL said:


> The world you facilitate is one where your own ideologues go unquestioned, as they usher in a new dystopia.




You have never heard of the maxim of "the burden of proof".

You made the allegation, you back it up.

You have done this many times, throw around vague allegations and expect people to believe what you say. Well , I can't be bothered doing your job for you.


----------



## wayneL (10 January 2021)

Just one of hundreds of links with a simple Duckduckgo search.



You should try it sometime


----------



## SirRumpole (10 January 2021)

wayneL said:


> Just one of hundreds of links with a simple Duckduckgo search.
> 
> 
> 
> You should try it sometime





Yes of course you will take any bs that confirms your opinion.  

Have you done any due diligence on anything you come up with ?


----------



## DB008 (10 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Name a few Biden lies just to make sure you are not spreading fake news.




Are you going to admit you were wrong or not?


----------



## sptrawler (10 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes of course you will take any bs that confirms your opinion.
> 
> Have you done any due diligence on anything you come up with ?



I haven't watched it, but is your bias making you say it's BS?
This really is where sooner or later some form of external independent censorship will have to be enacted IMO, like newscorp is right, fairfax is left so neither are credible.
It is a real issue IMO and I really don't care either way, but by the veracity of both sides, it obviously isn't going to get better until a realistic center is found.
Just my opinion.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 January 2021)

sptrawler said:


> I haven't watched it, but is your bias making you say it's BS?
> This really is where sooner or later some form of external independent censorship will have to be enacted IMO, like newscorp is right, fairfax is left so neither are credible.
> It is a real issue IMO.




Like ABC/RMIT Fact Check ?

But they are biased as well of course.


----------



## rederob (10 January 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Firstly the media broadcasting anything isn't a privilege, it is based on a commercial decision or a regulatory requirement, if it is a private broadcaster they make a decision on whether they think it will appeal to their audience. That isn't a privilege, unless you are a needy person and will pay them to give you air time.



That anyone is given media airtime is *in fact* a "privilege" as it provides amplification of their expression, which gives their view an advantage over a person not granted similar.  That privilege exists irrespective of the platform being private or public.


sptrawler said:


> The media has a lot of influence on public opinion, if it didn't companies, politicians etc wouldn't pay money to advertise and or appeal to the public for their custom or vote.



In fact, *content *- or what I have also called "expression" -  is what has influence.  Media and carriage services are simply "means."


sptrawler said:


> In terms of "reinforcement", I think you prove my point, by highlighting media that has differing opinion to yours.



That is not a logical expression.  Reinforcement occurs by visiting media/carriage services that have similar themes.  I visit a broad range of carriage services to sort fact from fiction, by and large.


sptrawler said:


> ... a large proportion of the population rely on the media to give them correct, accurate and unadulterated information.



And in Australia we trust our public broadcasters:






I get most of my US news from PBS, European news from BBC and DW, and for China/Asia go to CGTN and SCMP. 
In Australia we have cross media ownership laws which in simple terms are supposed to ensure no single commercial entity can brainwash the population: based on the fallacious principal that diversity of ownership equals diversity of opinion.  As you note, influence can be bought, so diversity of opinion runs a poor second to commercial interest.
My personal opinion is that our ABC in particular has in recent decades been subject to increasingly intensive political pressure to promote the "government's" view, and that purely political appointments to the ABC board have not been helpful to its charter of impartiality.  If the ABC were off limits to political interference, as the courts are, then its trust would grow and commercial outlets could ply the good the bad and the ugly as they saw fit.
And while on this topic, ACMA needs to be given real teeth if some of the crap that passes as news/journalism is to be cleaned up.


----------



## sptrawler (10 January 2021)

rederob said:


> That anyone is given media airtime is *in fact* a "privilege" as it provides amplification of their expression, which gives their view an advantage over a person not granted similar.  That privilege exists irrespective of the platform being private or public.
> In fact, *content *- or what I have also called "expression" -  is what has influence.  Media and carriage services are simply "means."
> That is not a logical expression.  Reinforcement occurs by visiting media/carriage services that have similar themes.  I visit a broad range of carriage services to sort fact from fiction, by and large.
> And in Australia we trust our public broadcasters:
> ...



As per usual Rob, we agree to disagree yet again.


----------



## wayneL (10 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes of course you will take any bs that confirms your opinion.
> 
> Have you done any due diligence on anything you come up with ?



Oh yes, Joe... In fact every single person in the Democrats are paragons of virtue. All George Washingtonesque in a complete inability to be able to lie.

ROTFLMAO

Come on Horace, surely you are not that naive?


----------



## SirRumpole (10 January 2021)

wayneL said:


> Oh yes, Joe... In fact every single person in the Democrats are paragons of virtue. All George Washingtonesque in a complete inability to be able to lie.
> 
> ROTFLMAO
> 
> Come on Horace, surely you are not that naive?




I don't think anyone is a paragon of virtue.

But looking at the record of Trump as President and an individual as opposed to Biden's record in Congress over most of his life, I make my judgement that on balance Biden is much more credible as a human being and as a politician.

We will see. He's been elected in a process that has seen the test of fairness in the courts so let's give him a chance.

Maybe we'll discuss this in 4 years and weigh up his performance.


----------



## wayneL (10 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> I don't think anyone is a paragon of virtue.
> 
> But looking at the record of Trump as President and an individual as opposed to Biden's record in Congress over most of his life, I make my judgement that on balance Biden is much more credible as a human being and as a politician.
> 
> ...



I'm looking at his appointments now.

While, yes, I have also always been prepared to sit back and observe for a while, I do have some expectations based upon those appointments.

Additionally, despite paying lip service to reconciliation of the factions, the reality is that the left is seeking retribution....

So I predict things wonts go well from here


----------



## noirua (10 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> I don't think anyone is a paragon of virtue.
> 
> But looking at the record of Trump as President and an individual as opposed to Biden's record in Congress over most of his life, I make my judgement that on balance Biden is much more credible as a human being and as a politician.
> 
> ...



President Obama was a 'lame duck' President for all of his second term and he pardoned many more people than most other presidents, exactly 1,927 - President Andrew Johnson pardoned about 7,000 people, President Trump 94 to date and two Presidents none at all.  He has however done very well in harnessing the black vote in 2020 for the Democrats in key states and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania though unsuccessful in Florida.








						List of people pardoned or granted clemency by the president of the United States - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				











						Pardons Granted by President Barack Obama (2009-2017)
					






					www.justice.gov
				











						Pardons Granted by President Donald Trump
					






					www.justice.gov


----------



## IFocus (10 January 2021)

Its really weird the bar accepted for Trump gets changed for Biden.

Is it a reality TV thing?

Regardless Biden is not the answer for the US current state of woe nor can he repair the divisions between capital and labour long lost to capital.

Nor can he repair the disfunction and disparity in regards to the distribution of wealth which clearly is a major underling cause of the current problems that no Trump support here is willing to address all preoccupied with the distraction of culture wars while power and wealth is silently filtered to the very few.

You really have to be a mug punter to think Trump was ever going to change the above.

You really have to be a mug punter if you think that Trump supporters and or conservatives would allow the above to be resolved.

That would be socialism, surely the end of civilization...eh.

Ignorance is a sweet wonderful state of mind.


----------



## sptrawler (10 January 2021)

IFocus said:


> Nor can he repair the disfunction and disparity in regards to the distribution of wealth which clearly is a major underling cause of the current problems that no Trump support here is willing to address all preoccupied with the distraction of culture wars while power and wealth is silently filtered to the very few.
> That would be socialism, surely the end of civilization...eh.
> 
> Ignorance is a sweet wonderful state of mind.



I think the socialists have shifted their following mate, the only people I know who are strong left leaning laborites these days, are extremely rich.
It is strange, but obviously the working class believe they will get better recognition for effort, from the right side of politics.
Maybe the masses feel they aren't rich enough to support the rich and the poor? Maybe only the rich can see the benefits that the left promote, who knows.
In socialist countries you only see the rich, the poor are too busy working their ar$es off, from what I have seen.


----------



## wayneL (10 January 2021)

sptrawler said:


> I think the socialists have shifted their following mate, the only people I know who are strong left leaning laborites these days, are extremely rich.
> It is strange, but obviously the working class believe they will get better recognition for effort, from the right side of politics.
> Maybe the masses feel they aren't rich enough to support the rich and the poor? Maybe only the rich can see the benefits that the left promote, who knows.



I don't see either party representing the average worker or small businessperson anymore. Neither party deserves our vote at all.

Unfortunately, the average worker or small business person does not realise that.... Both parties are corporatists with no interest in you or me.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 January 2021)

sptrawler said:


> In socialist countries you only see the rich, the poor are too busy working their ar$es off, from what I have seen.




Good description of the US at this point in time.


----------



## sptrawler (11 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Good description of the US at this point in time.



The other way of looking at it is, google a list of socialist countries and work out which one you would prefer to live in.
I've never lived or worked in the U.S, so it is difficult for me to give an opinion on what life is like there, the closest thing I can work on is that Judge Judy small claims show as it has no political leaning and is focused on day to day trivial matters.
From that it appears that people fight over minimal amounts of money, so money must be tight there, also it is obvious there is a social welfare system and a disability system of sorts, as Judge Judy appears to very critical of it. When from anecdotal evidence, I thought there was no welfare system, at all.
The other aspect of the U.S is,  I don't see many fleeing it, but do note they as us in Australia and the U.K etc have an issue with people trying to get there.
So from that I find it difficult to reconcile that it is the hell hole, that many try to portray, but if you have been there and lived there, I will defer to your experience Rumpy.


----------



## wayneL (11 January 2021)

I half grew up and still have relatives there. If you have a skill you can live a decent lifestyle, but it depends where you live.

For unskilled it's a grind, pretty much like here and in some areas life isn't all that flash at all... Gettos and suchlike.

My family was middle class, worked hard and built a nice lifestyle, pretty much like our life here in Oz.


----------



## dutchie (11 January 2021)

“In China you have a State-run media, in the US you have a media-run State”


----------



## SirRumpole (11 January 2021)

sptrawler said:


> The other way of looking at it is, google a list of socialist countries and work out which one you would prefer to live in.
> I've never lived or worked in the U.S, so it is difficult for me to give an opinion on what life is like there, the closest thing I can work on is that Judge Judy small claims show as it has no political leaning and is focused on day to day trivial matters.
> From that it appears that people fight over minimal amounts of money, so money must be tight there, also it is obvious there is a social welfare system and a disability system of sorts, as Judge Judy appears to very critical of it. When from anecdotal evidence, I thought there was no welfare system, at all.
> The other aspect of the U.S is,  I don't see many fleeing it, but do note they as us in Australia and the U.K etc have an issue with people trying to get there.
> So from that I find it difficult to reconcile that it is the hell hole, that many try to portray, but if you have been there and lived there, I will defer to your experience Rumpy.




I'd rather live in the US than North Korea for sure, but that doesn't mean that everything is rosy there.

The minimum wage is $7 an hour, exploitation levels, and there are lots of working poor.

Maybe Biden will do something about that, we'll see.


----------



## dutchie (11 January 2021)

Donald Trump made a feeble attempt to delay 1984, he failed miserably.
Everyone cheered.


----------



## Bill M (11 January 2021)

Wow, this is a powerful speech and sums up my feelings on the matter.


----------



## dutchie (11 January 2021)

Bill M said:


> Wow, this is a powerful speech and sums up my feelings on the matter.




Democracy ? No just a continuation of Wall St.


----------



## basilio (11 January 2021)

Bill M said:


> Wow, this is a powerful speech and sums up my feelings on the matter.





Certainly puts it all together..

That was an outstanding speech and summary of where we at. The personal historical story of growing up in a Nazi family post WW2 was a great reminder of where  the lies and rhetoric of Donald Trump was taking the US. 
And  he also put on notice  the fellow travellers who supported these lies..

Have to say Arnie was one of the  very good Republican leaders in US history.  (I wonder if Biden would give him a job ? )


----------



## dutchie (11 January 2021)

Hypocrisy


----------



## Bill M (11 January 2021)

basilio said:


> Have to say Arnie was one of the very good Republican leaders in US history.



And there you go basilio, I didn't even know Arnie was a Republican. I'm all for common decency and respect for all. What he said is what I felt, I'd certainly vote for Arnie if I ever had the chance too.


----------



## dutchie (11 January 2021)

Bill M said:


> I'd certainly vote for Arnie if I ever had the chance too.



As long as you vote for Wall St you will be a winner (although voting per se will be a pointless exercise).


----------



## sptrawler (11 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> I'd rather live in the US than North Korea for sure, but that doesn't mean that everything is rosy there.
> 
> The minimum wage is $7 an hour, exploitation levels, and *there are lots of working poor*.
> 
> Maybe Biden will do something about that, we'll see.



Since the outsourcing of manufacturing to third world countries, there is a lot of low paid jobs, or no work at all, the only ones who get richer are the rich who either own the companies, have high paying office jobs in the companies or have shares in the companies.
How Biden will turn it around is impossible to see IMO, Trump tried to bring manufacturing back to supply higher skilled and higher paid jobs, but you have seen how that went.
So in reality it will just be more of the same, I see China's Nio looks remarkable like a Tesla model 3, not to worry Tesla is making a factory in China, how long before the U.S one is shut down? 
People wonder why there is anger, obviously a huge lack of perception, care or compassion I would say.


----------



## IFocus (11 January 2021)

sptrawler said:


> I think the socialists have shifted their following mate, the only people I know who are strong left leaning laborites these days, are extremely rich.
> It is strange, but obviously the working class believe they will get better recognition for effort, from the right side of politics.
> Maybe the masses feel they aren't rich enough to support the rich and the poor? Maybe only the rich can see the benefits that the left promote, who knows.
> In socialist countries you only see the rich, the poor are too busy working their ar$es off, from what I have seen.





SP the Socialist comment was sarcasm, any mooted changes to the US currently is always label  a Socialist plot.

The workers voting Republican do so on the basis of being patriots and fighting against culture wars.

Read any thread here and you will see the same. Conservatives have long deployed this strategy.

Go and find one policy that the Republicans have put in place for the middle and lower classes that they haven't doubled for the rich.


----------



## sptrawler (11 January 2021)

IFocus said:


> SP the Socialist comment was sarcasm, any mooted changes to the US currently is always label  a Socialist plot.
> 
> The workers voting Republican do so on the basis of being patriots and fighting against culture wars.
> 
> ...



Mate show me anywhere in the world where the rich don't get richer, the only way the working class can get richer is by giving them better paying jobs, not by being condescending and giving them better welfare while getting rid of their jobs.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 January 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Since the outsourcing of manufacturing to third world countries, there is a lot of low paid jobs, or no work at all, the only ones who get richer are the rich who either own the companies, have high paying office jobs in the companies or have shares in the companies.
> How Biden will turn it around is impossible to see IMO, Trump tried to bring manufacturing back to supply higher skilled and higher paid jobs, but you have seen how that went.
> So in reality it will just be more of the same, I see China's Nio looks remarkable like a Tesla model 3, not to worry Tesla is making a factory in China, how long before the U.S one is shut down?
> People wonder why there is anger, obviously a huge lack of perception, care or compassion I would say.




Yes, I agree.

I've said before that the only way around this is progressive tariff increases based on the difference between our average wage and that of the countries that we import from.

At least that will give local manufacturers/producers a chance of survival. 

Sure the big companies won't like it and it's going to be a test of resolve for any government that tries to do this.

Otherwise Ch... will only get stronger economically, and that obviously means militarily as well.


----------



## sptrawler (11 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, I agree.
> 
> I've said before that the only way around this is progressive tariff increases based on the difference between our average wage and that of the countries that we import from.
> 
> ...



Absolutely, but why would the multinationals want to relocate their manufacturing back to high labour cost countries and reduce their profits massively? What is in it for them, nothing.
Who is the only politician who has demanded that the multi nationals do that? Who is now gone and being buried as a warning to any other politician who thinks it is a smart move?
Not that I care, people get what they deserve, the rich get richer and want to keep it that way. The last election in Australia showed people are at last joining the dots, the next Australian election will show if the momentum has continued.
Anyway drifting off topic, but it does all show, who owns the media owns the information.
The sooner the media gets paid by people who want to watch it, rather than the ones advertising on it, the better IMO.
Like I said earlier, the next media targets will be Boris Johnson and Scott Morrison, they are the only other two pushing the build it at home agenda ( Brexit and increasing foreign investment scrutiny) the elites will want all that stuff nipped in the bud.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 January 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Absolutely, but why would the multinationals want to relocate their manufacturing back to high labour cost countries and reduce their profits massively? What is in it for them, nothing.
> Who is the only politician who has demanded that the multi nationals do that? Who is now gone and being buried as a warning to any other politician who thinks it is a smart move?
> Not that I care, people get what they deserve, the rich get richer and want to keep it that way. The last election in Australia showed people are at last joining the dots, the next Australian election will show if the momentum has continued.
> Anyway drifting off topic, but it does all show, who owns the media owns the information.
> ...




Scott Morrison is pushing a "build at home " agenda ?

Are you talking about Defence manufacturing or a wider agenda ?

I must say I haven't heard that, but good on him if he is.

*but why would the multinationals want to relocate their manufacturing back to high labour cost countries and reduce their profits massively? *

They would'nt , but neither do they like having their IP ripped off or their executives arrested when convenient to other governments.

If tariffs even up the playing field in regard to costs, then they may find it's a lot easier to manufacture at home where they can manipulate politicians.


----------



## sptrawler (11 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> *but why would the multinationals want to relocate their manufacturing back to high labour cost countries and reduce their profits massively? *
> 
> They would'nt , but neither do they like having their IP ripped off or their executives arrested when convenient to other governments.



If that were true Tesla, VW, BMW etc wouldn't be building car plants in China, to them it is all about the bottom line, 1.5billion people in China, so you lose a bit of tech but you get to sell into that market and also manufacture there for export to high markup countries.
It really isn't that difficult, with multinationals it is the sum total of the game, not what you or I want, although is nice and romantic to think they actually give a rats about us. 😂 .
The media is all about the art of misdirection, keep the plebs running around in circles with pitchforks, while their houses are quietly being removed. 
Who was the only one calling out China for stealing IP?  

_About 10 months after *Tesla* Shanghai delivered the first batch of locally made *Tesla* 3s, the US-based electric car company announced that it will *export China*-made *Tesla* 3s to a dozen European countries._


----------



## sptrawler (11 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Scott Morrison is pushing a "build at home " agenda ?
> 
> Are you talking about Defence manufacturing or a wider agenda ?
> 
> I must say I haven't heard that, but good on him if he is.



The difficulty for Morrison, will be keeping a target off his back and staying under the radar, he has done well until now but the Chinese are getting agitated, he isn't playing to script. 








						Morrison government toughens foreign investment scrutiny to protect 'national security'
					

Under a new national security test the foreign investment review board will have to be notified by foreign investors hoping to secure a ‘sensitive national security business.




					theconversation.com
				












						Taxpayers, CSL to build vaccine manufacturing plant
					

The Morrison government will spend $1 billion over a decade to underwrite the construction of a new vaccine production facility to guarantee the nation continues to have its own supply of flu shots, antivenins and, if another pandemic occurs, the sovereign capability to look after its own...




					www.afr.com
				












						PM pledges $400m to film industry in bid to bring blockbusters to Australian shores
					

Prime Minister Scott Morrison will visit the Gold Coast today to pledge $400 million in a bid to attract overseas investors but Screen Producers Australia say the focus should be on Australian productions.




					www.abc.net.au
				











						Scott Morrison names six priority areas in $1.5 billion plan to boost manufacturing
					

The federal government is selecting six priority areas for support in a $1.5 billion manufacturing plan Scott Morrison will outline in a pre-budget address.




					theconversation.com
				




It is all really interesting stuff and we are a very small fish in a very big pond, but just my thoughts as usual. I find it all very interesting, but maybe I'm just bored.lol.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 January 2021)

sptrawler said:


> If that were true Tesla, VW, BMW etc wouldn't be building car plants in China, to them it is all about the bottom line, 1.5billion people in China, so you lose a bit of tech but you get to sell into that market and also manufacture there for export to high markup countries.
> It really isn't that difficult, with multinationals it is the sum total of the game, not what you or I want, although is nice and romantic to think they actually give a rats about us. 😂 .
> The media is all about the art of misdirection, keep the plebs running around in circles with pitchforks, while their houses are quietly being removed.
> Who was the only one calling out China for stealing IP?
> ...




Yes, isn't it amazing how these companies are falling for the same cr@p that China sold us ?

Get people dependent on them then put the boot in.

There must be morons leading some of these companies.


----------



## sptrawler (11 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, isn't it amazing how these companies are falling for the same cr@p that China sold us ?
> 
> Get people dependent on them then put the boot in.
> 
> There must be morons leading some of these companies.



No they are very smart people, they are becoming unimaginably wealthy, while the plebs run around in circles poking each other and being tribal. We are the morons, by believing everything we are told by the media, but that is in our subservient DNA all just a fact of life IMO. 
Que Sera, the only glimmer of hope IMO, was the result of our last election and Brexit they stopped the wave in its tracks. For the moment. 

Like I said Rumpy, just watch the screws start on Morrison/ Johnson and try to stand back and analyse it.
Just my opinion.


----------



## sptrawler (11 January 2021)

Bill M said:


> Wow, this is a powerful speech and sums up my feelings on the matter.




Would that be another millionaire, telling us how lucky the plebs in the U.S are? 😂


----------



## basilio (11 January 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Would that be another millionaire, telling us how lucky the plebs in the U.S are? 😂




Nah. Clearly didn't take an opportunity to view it or you wouldn't have made such a totally off point comment.


----------



## DB008 (11 January 2021)

Double Standards ?











.​


----------



## sptrawler (11 January 2021)

basilio said:


> Nah. Clearly didn't take an opportunity to view it or you wouldn't have made such a totally off point comment.



Your right I didn't view it and I do like Arnie, so I thought i had better watch it.
As usual a great production very moving and appropriate music in the background.
My parents and grandparents were in the war in the U.K, so I do know what he talks about in relation to the war and a father who beat up the wife and kids.
What I have a problem with, is comparing disenfranchised and unhappy U.S citizens making a statement and comparing it to Nazi Europe.
As I posted earlier, there was a situation in the U.S in the 1960's, where students protesting against the Vietnam war were shot.
The U.S is a melting pot of volatile politics and as has been shown on many occasions emotions boil over there, that is why I don't understand it and don't claim to.
But I'm sure they could get just as high a profile person, to explain exactly the same reasoning for the other side, the problem is those who believe everything on face value. But the Conan sword was impressive and I can see how you were moved, that is another 7 minutes of my life i will never get back.


----------



## moXJO (11 January 2021)

sptrawler said:


> . But the Conan sword was impressive and I can see how you were moved, that is another 7 minutes of my life i will never get back.




How could the Conan sword not sell it for you?
And nazis don't forget them. Oh plus you become a wife beater if you don't lick boot. Come on sp that speech had it all.


----------



## sptrawler (11 January 2021)

basilio said:


> Nah. Clearly didn't take an opportunity to view it or you wouldn't have made such a totally off point comment.



Another thing Bas, while we are having a laugh, it wasn't long ago you were holding Trump to account for his immoral  female indiscretions.
Now you are using someone to judge him morally, who apparently was banging the cleaner, guess as long as the story fits just shove it in. 😂
Seems to work for you.


----------



## sptrawler (11 January 2021)

Jeez I hate to be drawn into the nuts and bolts of this issue, but this guy is right, Twitter has no right to suspend Trumps account, when they see fit.
They are a media carriage of information, if they disagree with what is being said they can put in bold highlights, flashing lights, bloody neon signs that they disagree with what is being said.
But they have no legislated right to ban someone from saying something, without approval, otherwise they become a self appointed censor of the presidents internet information.
Which is fine when the pitchfork crew agree with the censorship, what happens when someone who is espousing their beliefs is shut out?
The whole thing is weird, we the public are handing over our moral compass to someone who own's a website, where does that end.
This is the whole problem with pitchford crowds running public opinion.
It really is heading towards a confrontation between media run countries, as opposed to government run countries, which has to end up with draconian legislation or mayhem.
The media takes down, what politicians say about the coverage, the politicians get frustrated by being misrepresented by the media, the circle gets more vicious then the manure hits the fan. 









						Senior ministers take aim at Trump social media silencing
					

Acting Prime Minister Michael McCormack says Twitter has gone too far in removing Donald Trump from its platform.




					www.theage.com.au


----------



## basilio (11 January 2021)

Well  you have seen it SP and had a couple of goes at it.  Has to be value there somewhere - even if you might not get the point.

The issue was the monstrous lies that Trump produced to whip up his  MAGA army into attacking the Capitol with a view to overthrowing Congress. It was about the use of a private army to overthrow the State.  The connection to  Kristallnacht or the Night of Broken Glass,  was very apposite reflecting a mob violence orchestrated by political influence.

It  is all very well to talk of "emotions boiling over".  But this was far more than that. It was about the *BIG LIE *of a stolen election. Constructed, repeated, embellished and relentlessly pushed on his Republician colleagues and his supporters in an effort to steal an election he clearly and soundly lost.

*You see SP et al Trump has never won anything fair and square in his life. *He has always rigged the game. Bulldozed any opponents. Just made up zhit to enable him to claim "Victory" .  For instance it sounds so puerile,but check out the reality behind his claim that he won 18 club  championships  at golf.  

Arnie called Trump out as a liar and a traitor. He also called out the critical Republician politicians who accepted his  brazen lies and then tried to beat the drum of overthrowing the result. These are the actions of a would be dictator.  I  would be confident that an investigation into the whole affair will come up with that conclusion. But we'll see.

I suppose the core of the situation now is that the Trump supporters on this forum are still  actively rooting for him or pretending that what has happened wasn't in fact sedition but "emotions boiling over". Very quaint. Sounds like the sort of excuse made for a lynch mob doesn't it ?

I can't say I'm  surprised.  You guys have invested a huge amount of ego on relentlessly supporting this guy. It would be a very courageous decision to say  *"Hey. Hold it.  He has gone too far now. This is wrong.  I won't support  these actions." 

---------------------------------------*

SP I'm bewildered by your attempt to say I was judging Trump on his sexual behaviors and now supporting someone who had an affair.

I mean *WTF *?  Firstly these  personal behaviors  have absolutely nothing to do with Trumps behaviour as politician and a demagogue.  Arnie called out his lies and his attempt to lead a political coup.  So  throwing this rubbish up is completely and  utterly irrelevant. 

But secondly if, you want to raise the sexual behaviors issue, the criticism of Trump was two fold.

Firstly he flat out lied about the consensual sexual relationships he had and  used election funds to buy silence. 

Secondly he flat out denied at least another 25 accusations of sexual misconduct brought by women from all walks of life who were abused by Trump.  And this denial came after he was caught on a hot mike boasting about his aggression on women.


----------



## sptrawler (12 January 2021)

Bas, it is all because you read it or heard it on the internet, what if Trump was trying to say this is BS, stop printing this stuff.
But they don't print it?
This is the problem they are under no obligation to print anything, but the masses believe everything.
Like I said a while back, I was involved in a strike i could P.M you with the details but won't put them online. What happened completely destroyed my belief in the fact the media print the truth. They print what suits them and that is dependent on who they are beholden to at the time.
So you go blindly along believing everything that aligns with your beliefs, but don't for one minute think it is an accurate representation of the truth.
I'll leave it at that.
Your beliefs are the result of living in a bubble IMO.
There is an old saying " believe what you see and half of what you hear", I think that applies a lot more these days.
Not to say Trump was in any way a person I would want to associate with, but it is very coincidental the only President that has taken on the multinationals, has been absolutely destroyed.
Maybe it is just a coincidence, but I really don't believe in coincidences that much.
Also I actually don't give a rats, I live by the motto allow for the worst, hope for the best. Also the saying 'change what you can accept what you can't'.
So What happens in the U.S I'm going to have no affect on, so really do i give a $hit? No
People going on, that the media has every right to say what they like and misrepresent everything they like. Well that does affect me and Australia, so I hope it doesn't get all out of control here, where facebook(which I'm not a member), or that twitter thing decides what I can read or not read. POl POT was bagged for doing that.


----------



## DB008 (12 January 2021)

Conditioning 101


----------



## moXJO (12 January 2021)

moXJO said:


> How could the Conan sword not sell it for you?
> And nazis don't forget them. Oh plus you become a wife beater if you don't lick boot. Come on sp that speech had it all.




Jokes aside, once you cut out the Hollywood bs then the heart of the message is correct. 

There is just no way I can see the US coming together at this time. I'm going to walk back my comments of a smooth transition. The demonstration provoked the exact reaction from the media to stoke the fire.


----------



## basilio (12 January 2021)

moXJO said:


> Jokes aside, once you cut out the Hollywood bs then *the heart of the message is correct. *
> 
> There is just no way I can see the US coming together at this time. I'm going to walk back my comments of a smooth transition. The * demonstration* (!!?) provoked the exact reaction from the media to stoke the fire.



*
"The heart of the message is correct "* That message was Arnies concern that the events  at the Capitol were a destruction of the principles democracy was based on. He also  excoriated  the politicians who supported the mob attack and saw them as culpable as Trump in promoting the lies about election outcome.  It has been these lies which have been used to drive this ongoing attack on the legitimacy of the Biden government.

So if we agree on the heart of the message we at least have reached the first step.

That makes *"demonstration" *as the description of attack on the Capitol building even more creative. The organisation of key members of the mob showed how determined they were to wreck havoc on Pence and co to  stop the counting of the votes that would confirm Biden as President. There is plenty of footage showing what happened. Check it out.










						Recalling Nazis From His Childhood, Arnold Schwarzenegger Decries The Capitol Assault
					

In an emotional video posted to Twitter, the former governor and Austrian immigrant says the mob that attacked the U.S. Capitol "trampled the very principles on which our country was founded."




					www.npr.org


----------



## sptrawler (12 January 2021)

We in Australia don't have the firearm issues the U.S have, we aren't as politically outspoken and emotional about politics as the U.S is.
But we aren't as pure as driven snow, with regarding storming the capital building either, but as usual we do have a lot to say about other peoples behaviour. Something China has been quick to pick upon. 
As usual bricks and glass houses come to mind, but as usual some people love to throw anyway.





__





						1996 Parliament House riot - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



From the article:

_The Australian Council of Trade Unions called the "cavalcade to Canberra" rally to protest against the industrial relations reform agenda of the Liberal-National Coalition Howard Government. The protest began with senior Australian Trade Union officials including ACTU President Jennie George and Assistant Secretary Greg Combet, as well as senior members of the Australian Labor Party rallying demonstrators from a podium.[1][2]

According to then President of the Senate, Margaret Reid, the initially peaceful protest deteriorated into violent action when a new group of demonstrators arrived in the early afternoon and, joined by people from the main protest, attacked the entrance to Parliament. Around 90 personnel were injured —including lacerations, sprains, and head and eye injuries. Damage to the forecourt and foyer of Parliament was initially estimated at $75,000 and the Parliamentary shop was looted. Nine rioters were arrested and charged with a variety of offences.


T]his group refused to accept police direction, forced a breach in police lines and ran towards the main front entrance of Parliament House. Unfortunately, it was apparent that some of these demonstrators were affected by alcohol. This group was supported by participants from the more general demonstration who were incited to join those involved in riotous conduct by a speaker from the official platform.

Police formed a protective line along the perimeter of the Great Verandah which was subsequently forced back to the main doors. The police line was withdrawn from this area due to the level of violence being experienced by officers and was redeployed to an area inside the front doors in support of parliamentary security personnel. This deployment stabilised the situation for a short period. However, demonstrators using increasing force broke through the first line of doors.

Once inside this area, demonstrators used weapons, including a large hammer, a wheel brace, a steel trolley and a stanchion torn from the external doors to break open the internal doors. Simultaneously, a second group of demonstrators used other weapons to break into the Parliament House shop, but were held at the internal doors. The shop was ransacked by demonstrators and major damage was caused by persons who subsequently occupied the area. After some two hours, the demonstrators were finally repelled from Parliament House and driven back onto the forecourt area and, shortly afterwards, they dispersed.











						Parliament stormed in Australian riots
					

Amid scenes unprecedented in Australia, dozens of chanting rioters yesterday stormed Parliament House in Canberra, smashing its front doors and leaving its public entrance hall spattered with blood. They threw acid and urine at more than 300 riot police who were called in to control the...




					www.independent.co.uk
				






			rioters at australian parliament 1996 images - Google Search
		

_


----------



## SirRumpole (12 January 2021)

sptrawler said:


> We in Australia don't have the firearm issues the U.S have, we aren't as politically outspoken and emotional about politics as the U.S is.
> But we aren't as pure as driven snow, with regarding storming the capital building either, but as usual we do have a lot to say about other peoples behaviour. Something China has been quick to pick upon.
> As usual bricks and glass houses come to mind, but as usual some people love to throw anyway.
> 
> ...




I suspect that after some of these anarchists are arrested, convicted for insurrection  and gaoled for life, the rest will disappear into the woodwork.


----------



## sptrawler (12 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> I suspect that after some of these anarchists are arrested, convicted for insurrection  and gaoled for life, the rest will disappear into the woodwork.



It just makes me cringe, when I hear our ranter's and chanters, acting as though we have the high moral ground. 
Also it surprises me how little research people do, before shooting off at the mouth, but that is the way today. Right or wrong it is freedom of speech, for all.


----------



## wayneL (12 January 2021)

"insurection"

LMAO, oh please!

Not discounting the possibility but you wanna really see the shyt hit the fan? Honestly that would be a fast track to either civil war, or absolute tyranny.

I don't think even you would want either of those, Horace.


----------



## bellenuit (12 January 2021)

Have those who claim Trump's free speech has been denied considered that he can hold press conferences, including official White House press conferences, at any time without censorship. He risks being asked questions though.


----------



## wayneL (12 January 2021)

bellenuit said:


> Have those who claim Trump's free speech has been denied considered that he can hold press conferences, including official White House press conferences, at any time without censorship. He risks being asked questions though.



Like the Twitter band it would be contingent upon the mainstream media actually broadcasting such a press conference.

There are many accusations been made against The Donald, which I'm finding it difficult to either confirm or repudiate because of the bans.

It seems to me that, ipso facto, Trump is being denied the opportunity to defend himself in the public arena in sofar as the majority of people have access to. I WANT TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT HE SAID, but finding it difficult to source that information accurately.

With a position such as POTUS, that is super important and should not be up to the whims of an obviously biased social media company.

Consider if, after biden's latest pronouncement, that he was deemed to be a racist (and it pretty fair assumption based on that pronouncement), he was banned from social media.

Can you predict your reaction? If you can't, I certainly can.

I would invite you to look deeply into your soul and consider the monumental hipocracy that you and those like you are indulging in. In no way is it healthy for our western culture.


----------



## rederob (12 January 2021)

wayneL said:


> Like the Twitter band it would be contingent upon the mainstream media actually broadcasting such a press conference.



As @bellenuit notes, Trump can say what he likes, and the White House YouTube account can live stream and archive it, so your point about contingency is without merit.







wayneL said:


> There are many accusations been made against The Donald, which I'm finding it difficult to either confirm or repudiate because of the bans.



You can find all the repudiations on fact checking sites although, with over 25000, there is a fair bit to go through if there is something specific you are concerned about.







wayneL said:


> It seems to me that, ipso facto, Trump is being denied the opportunity to defend himself in the public arena in sofar as the majority of people have access to. I WANT TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT HE SAID, but finding it difficult to source that information accurately.



Rather disingenuous as Trump has made an artform of not being responsive to questions from the media, lying when he's in trouble, and otherwise hiding from public scrutiny.  Specifically, however, every public comment Trump has made can be found on the internet.







wayneL said:


> With a position such as POTUS, that is super important and should not be up to the whims of an obviously biased social media company.



Media organisations do not want to be associated with further incitement attempts and have legitimately removed platforms that facilitate his proven delusions.

WRT to your comment on Biden, it's an unworthy, unsubstantiatable,  false equivalence.


----------



## bellenuit (12 January 2021)

wayneL said:


> Like the Twitter band it would be contingent upon the mainstream media actually broadcasting such a press conference.




But Fox would broadcast it even if he stated blatant lies.  The other MSMs would too, so long as he is not instigating violence. The White House web site would in any case carry the complete text of what he said. There is no way you can claim that you couldn't access what he would have said if you just use a little initiative.


----------



## wayneL (12 January 2021)

Interesting mental gymnastics....

But okay @rederob & @bellenuit 

I do have limited time, I do have to make a living and have other commitments, perhaps you can help me.

Notwithstanding he has said some pretty dumb shyt in recent days, can you direct me to the comments which particularly incite violence? I don't deny that he has made such comments but would like to see/hear them.

I would also appreciate your analysis in comparing to any such comments to comments from the democratic side of politics which have obviously incited violence over the last year eg Maxine Waters and Kamala Harris ( et et al (sic))


----------



## rederob (12 January 2021)

wayneL said:


> Interesting mental gymnastics....
> 
> But okay @rederob & @bellenuit
> 
> ...



Trump has an obligation to uphold the Constitution, above all others.  That includes respecting all laws and facilitating a smooth transition from office.
Instead, Trump fomented post-election supporter outrage and actively encouraged the falsehood that the election was rigged and "stolen" from him, *and *- importantly - something needed to be done about it.  Under US law this constitutes "incitement."


----------



## wayneL (12 January 2021)

rederob said:


> Trump has an obligation to uphold the Constitution, above all others.  That includes respecting all laws and facilitating a smooth transition from office.
> Instead, Trump fomented post-election supporter outrage and actively encouraged the falsehood that the election was rigged and "stolen" from him, *and *- importantly - something needed to be done about it.  Under US law this constitutes "incitement."



"Something needed to be done" does not explicitly imply anything, much less violence.

Once again, some pretty dodgy mental gymnastics to try to imply incitement.

Additionally you have not answered my call to analyse statements from the democratic side which were clearly explicit incitement to violence, most notably Maxine Waters.

There are actually dozens of other examples of implicit incitements from the democratic side. Why are you not concerned about them?


----------



## rederob (12 January 2021)

wayneL said:


> "Something needed to be done" does not explicitly imply anything, much less violence.
> 
> Once again, some pretty dodgy mental gymnastics to try to imply incitement.
> 
> ...



Trump incited actions.  They included those matters outlined in the attached Articles of Impeachment.  To suggest "mental gymnastics" is needed to work out what was going on for the past 2 months is somewhat far fetched.  All intelligence agencies knew what could play out on 6 January, and it is inconceivable that the Commander in Chief was not briefed.  Given what he knew, he had a duty of Office to prevent it.  Instead he and his enablers at the Ellipse encouraged via comments such as "_*if you don’t fight like hell, *_" his supporters to act in a manner which was foreseeable.


----------



## wayneL (12 January 2021)

You can interpret to your own ends all you like, but where is the *explicit* incitement @rederob ?

You know, like Maxine Waters did?

Until then, you have nothing.


----------



## rederob (12 January 2021)

wayneL said:


> You can interpret to your own ends all you like, but where is the *explicit* *incitement *@rederob ?
> 
> You know, like Maxine Waters did?
> 
> Until then, you have nothing.



You need to acquaint yourself with what words mean, as "*explicit*" is redundant.


----------



## wayneL (12 January 2021)

IOW, you got nothing bro.

But FYI


explicit
[ ik-splis-it ]SHOW IPA

See synonyms for: explicit / explicitly / explicitness on Thesaurus.com
adjective
fully and clearly expressed or demonstrated; leaving nothing merely implied; unequivocal:
explicit instructions; an explicit act of violence; explicit language.

clearly developed or formulated:
explicit knowledge; explicit belief.
definite and unreserved in expression; outspoken:
He was quite explicit as to what he expected us to do for him.

(Non applicable meaning deleted)


----------



## SirRumpole (12 January 2021)

"



*Re: ****ASF Breaking News*****

What a crock if shyte, pixel.

I we (or lunatics like bandt) praise such actions, then that legitimizes any and every group of protesters with a faux grievance, tree huggers, anti immigration groups, PETA, the pro gun lobby, legalize marijuana groups, the list goes on and on.

What then? Parliament ceases to function because of riff raff and wasters glueing themselves to the furniture.


Think about what you are saying, man. That's just ludicrous.

This really belongd in the lunatic left thread. 




Slowly we inch....
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------                                                                                                 

Post #4 in this thread.

Thanks H.


----------



## wayneL (12 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> "
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Not the point at all.

Clearly  violence should be disavowed, and I do so in the strongest terms!

What we are talking about is Trump's purported incitement to violence. 

Where is it?


----------



## rederob (12 January 2021)

wayneL said:


> IOW, you got nothing bro.
> 
> But FYI
> 
> ...



Maybe you should look up "redundant" as well.
I won't be responding further to you on this as the Articles of Impeachment are water tight from a legal perspective and you instead are indulging in diversions.


----------



## wayneL (12 January 2021)

And Horace, in what universe did I even hint at condoning those actions?

You can't just keep inventing shyt bro.


----------



## wayneL (12 January 2021)

Thanks @rederob.

Nobody is any clearer as to what Trump actually said. Good work.


----------



## bellenuit (12 January 2021)

wayneL said:


> Not the point at all.
> 
> Clearly  violence should be disavowed, and I do so in the strongest terms!
> 
> ...




He may be stupid and his followers may be twice as stupid, but he is not so stupid as to actually state openly "kill Pelosi" or "kill Pence". But he uses his "lieutenants" to say the most extreme stuff, and then doesn't condemn them for saying such things and often praises them, indicating to his extreme followers that he therefore must agree with what is being said. 

But just like Hitler blamed the Jews for all problems in German society leading to Kristallnacht, Trump deliberately lied and claimed the election was stolen when it wasn't. He told people to march on the Capitol and in fact said he would  go with them but didn't (another story). His lawyer Guiliani at that same WH gathering said "Let’s have trial by combat". This after 33 + (I think) court cases over the legality of the vote have been lost by him/Trump. Trump was out there saying state election officials acted fraudulently (when they didn't).

_Trump’s statements leading up to and during the storming of the Capitol building, however, did not include explicit calls for a violent attack on America’s democratic institutions. Instead, those laying blame on Trump are pointing in part to rhetoric that agitated his followers with conspiratorial lies and instilled a sense of imminent doom—while relying on them to make the final decision to act. This is a version of the “stochastic terrorism” tactics common to authoritarian leaders around the world.

In recent weeks, Trump heavily promoted the rally that led directly to the assault on the Capitol. The rally was part of the “Stop the Steal” movement, which, fueled by Trump’s own conspiratorial fantasies, explicitly aimed to halt the certification of Joe Biden’s election victory. On Dec. 19, Trump promised a “big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!” Trump promoted the rally again on Dec. 27, Dec. 30, and Jan. 1, in tweets compiled by the New York Times.









						Incitement to Riot? What Trump Told Supporters Before Mob Stormed Capitol
					

Here is a closer look at what the president said at a rally of his supporters, which is a central focus of the impeachment case being prepared against him.




					www.nytimes.com
				




Asked specifically if that included Trump, who had urged the crowd to “fight like hell” before the rioting began, Sherwin replied: “We are looking at all actors here, and anyone that had a role, if the evidence fits the element of a crime, they’re going to be charged.”









						Incitement to Riot? What Trump Told Supporters Before Mob Stormed Capitol
					

Here is a closer look at what the president said at a rally of his supporters, which is a central focus of the impeachment case being prepared against him.




					www.nytimes.com
				



_
After the insurrection was ended, Trump said of those involved: "_We love you, you're very special_."

He later backtracked on that after he saw the reaction from fellow republicans and other leaders.

Wayne, you should have enough nous to be able to sift through the words and understand that words on their own may seem innocuous, but can be be used to deliberately ignite violence when the context and circumstances in which they are said is understood. The number of his WH staff and others who resigned later that day should show you that they understood what Trump meant even though his words may not explicitly have said such things.


----------



## wayneL (12 January 2021)

bellenuit said:


> He may be stupid and his followers may be twice as stupid, but he is not so stupid as to actually state openly "kill Pelosi" or "kill Pence". But he uses his "lieutenants" to say the most extreme stuff, and then doesn't condemn them for saying such things and often praises them, indicating to his extreme followers that he therefore must agree with what is being said.
> 
> But just like Hitler blamed the Jews for all problems in German society leading to Kristallnacht, Trump deliberately lied and claimed the election was stolen when it wasn't. He told people to march on the Capitol and in fact said he would  go with them but didn't (another story). His lawyer Guiliani at that same WH gathering said "Let’s have trial by combat". This after 33 + (I think) court cases over the legality of the vote have been lost by him/Trump. Trump was out there saying state election officials acted fraudulently (when they didn't).
> 
> ...



But don't you you see you are constructing a case using a fair few airy fairy assumptions.

Compare to Maxine, Kamala, et al before and during BLM riots.

Why are you ignoring their direct, explicit incitement?

Especially Kamala who will probably be president in two years?

Why the double standard?

Look, if Trump can be found to have actually incited, I'll can him with as much gusto as y'all.

But your mental acrobatics just done but the target beyond doubt.


----------



## DB008 (12 January 2021)

Double Standards









.​


----------



## SirRumpole (12 January 2021)

Fact check on some political comments.









						PolitiFact - Quotes by 4 Democrats twisted to make it look like they endorsed riots
					

After pro-Trump rioters stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, some have taken to social media to criticize liberals who ha




					www.politifact.com


----------



## basilio (12 January 2021)

bellenuit said:


> He may be stupid and his followers may be twice as stupid, but he is not so stupid as to actually state openly "kill Pelosi" or "kill Pence". But he uses his "lieutenants" to say the most extreme stuff, and then doesn't condemn them for saying such things and often praises them, indicating to his extreme followers that he therefore must agree with what is being said.
> 
> But just like Hitler blamed the Jews for all problems in German society leading to Kristallnacht, Trump deliberately lied and claimed the election was stolen when it wasn't. He told people to march on the Capitol and in fact said he would  go with them but didn't (another story). His lawyer Guiliani at that same WH gathering said "Let’s have trial by combat". This after 33 + (I think) court cases over the legality of the vote have been lost by him/Trump. Trump was out there saying state election officials acted fraudulently (when they didn't).
> 
> ...




Excellent, succinct summary.  Probably the most significant point was the effect  and consequences of Trumps actions  on the remaining WH staff who couldn't stomach the clearly seditious nature of what had happened.

And when Lindsay Graham, Bill Barr, and Mitch McConnell  finally decide enough is enough you know this is a very dangerous path.


----------



## basilio (12 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Fact check on some political comments.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Thanks Rumpy.  Always worth checking these "alleged incitements". Frankly I have yet to see one that was an honest representation of what was said or meant.
Taking sound bites out of statements made in quite different circumstances and then pasting them up the way they have been . Very Trumpian indeed.


----------



## basilio (12 January 2021)

Came across an exceptionally good analysis of the "Self Coup" Trump attempted to stage on 6th January .
Fiona joins a lot of dots  and teh final picture is damming. Very detailed. Well worth a read IMV .

*Yes, It Was a Coup. Here’s Why.*
What Trump tried is called a “self-coup,” and he did it in slow motion and in plain sight.

By FIONA HILL
01/11/2021 03:15 PM EST

_Fiona Hill served as deputy assistant to the president and senior director for European and Russian affairs on the National Security Council from 2017 to 2019. She is currently a senior fellow in the Center on the United States and Europe at the Brookings Institution._

Since last Wednesday, people have been arguing what to call what happened at the U.S. Capitol — was it a riot? An uprising? An insurrection? I’ve been public in calling it a coup, but others disagree. Some have said it’s not a coup because the U.S. military and other armed groups weren’t involved, and some because Donald Trump didn’t invoke his presidential powers in support of the mob that broke into the Capitol. Others point out that no one has claimed or proved there was a secret plan directed by the president, and that Trump’s efforts to overturn the outcome of the 2020 presidential election could never have succeeded in the first place.

These observations are based on the idea that a coup is a sudden, violent seizure of power involving clandestine plots and military takeovers. By contrast, Trump’s goal was to _keep himself in power_, and his actions were taken over a period of months and in slow motion.

But that doesn’t mean it wasn’t a coup attempt. Trump disguised what he was doing by operating in plain sight, talking openly about his intent. He normalized his actions so people would accept them. I’ve been studying authoritarian regimes for three decades, and I know the signs of a coup when I see them.

Technically, what Trump attempted is what’s known as a “self-coup” and Trump isn’t the first leader to try it. Charles Louis Napoleon Bonaparte (nephew of the first Napoleon) pulled one off in France in December 1851 to stay in power beyond his term. Then he declared himself Emperor, Napoleon III. More recently, Nicolas Maduro perpetrated a self-coup in Venezuela after losing the 2017 elections.

The storming of the Capitol building on January 6 was the culmination of a series of actions and events taken or instigated by Trump so he could retain the presidency that together amount to an attempt at a self-coup. This was not a one-off or brief episode. Trump declared “election fraud” immediately on November 4 even while the votes were still being counted. He sought to recount and rerun the election so that he, not Joe Biden, was the winner. In Turkey, in 2015, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan successfully did the same thing; he had called elections to strengthen his presidency, but his party lost its majority in the Parliament. He challenged the results in the courts, marginalized the opposition and forced what he blatantly called a “re-run election.” He tried again in the Istanbul mayoral election in 2019 but was thwarted.

There’s a standard coup “checklist” analysts use to evaluate coups. We can evaluate Trump’s moves to prevent the peaceful transfer of executive power against it. To successfully usurp or hold power, you need to control the military and paramilitary units, communications, the judiciary, government institutions, and the legislature; and mobilize popular support.

Let’s see how well this applies to what Trump has done.









						Opinion | Yes, It Was a Coup Attempt. Here’s Why.
					

What Trump tried is called a “self-coup,” and he did it in slow motion and in plain sight.




					www.politico.com


----------



## wayneL (12 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Fact check on some political comments.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Oh come on Horace. We watched some of the quotes in real time. Especially Waters and Harris


----------



## SirRumpole (12 January 2021)

wayneL said:


> Oh come on Horace. We watched some of the quotes in real time. Especially Waters and Harris




From the other side of the world wayne.


----------



## dutchie (13 January 2021)

Interesting stat. Of all the people arrested for the Capital Hill protest so far - number who have Parler accounts = 0


----------



## SirRumpole (13 January 2021)

'Well may we say God save the Queen because nothing will save the Governor General'.

'Maintain the rage'

Would Whitlam have been banned from social media if it existed in those days ?

Quite possibly , but those words have gone down as a part of our history.

Did Whitlam want to stoke an uprising ?

He certainly wanted demonstrations, I doubt if he wanted a takeover of Parliament, but given the gun situation in the US Trump should have been more restrained.


----------



## rederob (13 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> 'Well may we say God save the Queen because nothing will save the Governor General'.
> 
> 'Maintain the rage'
> 
> ...



Whitlam never lied about an event or circumstances to foster foment.  
On the other hand, in the USA there are explicit laws against rebellion and insurrection that so called big tech will be abundantly aware of.
Given what has transpired, and applicable laws, it would be foolish for big tech to think they were out of reach.  To reduce that possibility it was necessary they remove the source of the problem, and that meant cutting Trump's access to their platforms.
Our acting PM and Treasurer might not like this, but they clearly do not understand US law.


----------



## sptrawler (13 January 2021)

It is amazing how quick we are to criticise, when in reality we are no paragons of virtue ourselves, our media throws up picture after picture of the capitol hill riots and condemns them.
Yet not one mention of the riots and mob attack on our parliament in 1996, we really are a changing society in Australia, self opinionated with diminishing ability to self appraise. We certainly are losing our Aussie charm IMO.
Maybe we always were a self opinionated, arrogant lot, but just never had the stage to display it, who knows.


----------



## dutchie (13 January 2021)

sptrawler said:


> We certainly are losing our Aussie charm IMO.



It has been going downhill for quite a while.


----------



## basilio (13 January 2021)

Wasn't it interesting how the thousands of MAGA supporters who crashed through the Capitol looking for Congressmen to hang or shoot took almost no trouble to hide their identities ? In fact of course many of them gave interviews, took selfies and boasted of their achievements.

*They believed that in Trumps USA you  can literally get away with anything if your The Boss or doing it on behalf of The Boss.*

So where did they get that confidence of criminal immunity ?  From The Boss of course.

._.The rioters were also imbued with the culture of impunity of the Trump era. This is a moment when bad behavior goes unpunished. The president has told his supporters that loyalty to his cause trumps fidelity to the law, and he has reinforced that message by handing out pardons to aides who get in trouble for putting him ahead of the law. The crowd he summoned to Capitol Hill on January 6 took that message to heart.

Trump did not invent this culture of impunity. Even before he broke onto the political scene, officeholders from* David Vitter to Bob Menendez to Chris Christie *were realizing that when caught in a scandal, they didn’t have to resign, and could just brazen it out. But Trump elevated this move from a tactic to a virtue. His 2016 campaign exalted getting away with it, whatever it was: *fleecing lenders**, buying off politicians, grabbing women by the crotch*. He encouraged violence against protesters at rallies, and even spoke of paying legal fees when someone punched a demonstrator. (Given his miserliness, it’s doubtful he followed through. Keeping promises, like following the rules, is for suckers.)

Trump governed the way he campaigned. He *systematically undermined the rule of law. *He almost certainly obstructed justice in the midst of a probe into the 2016 election, but Special Counsel Robert Mueller shied away from saying so out of procedural concerns. When Trump tried to extort the Ukrainian government into assisting his reelection campaign, he was impeached by the House but—in the acme of his impunity—acquitted by the Senate.

This impunity extended to others. Members of his staff *consistently violated the Hatch Act*, but sanctions required the president to act, which he did not. More egregiously, he handed out pardons to criminals who not only broke the rules clearly but showed no penitence, such as Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Dinesh D’Souza. He also dangled and sometimes gave out pardons to people who broke the law on his behalf: Michael Flynn, Roger Stone, Paul Manafort. Those who cooperated with prosecutors, such as Michael Cohen, were frozen out and even *subjected to apparent Justice Department retaliation**.*

These favors were returned. Stone became a force behind the “Stop the Steal” movement that culminated on January 6; Flynn called for martial law after the election and spoke at the rally that day. No wonder that as the rioters swarmed toward the Capitol, they concluded that the rules didn’t apply to them. They might have even expected that Trump would pardon them if they got in trouble.









						Why the Rioters Thought They Could Get Away With It
					

Trump told supporters that loyalty to his cause is more important than fidelity to the law, and they took his message to heart.




					www.theatlantic.com
				



_


----------



## dutchie (13 January 2021)

Monopolies - don't you love them? 

So good for our societies.


"But today, if you want to download, sign up for, or use Parler, you will be unable to do so. That is because three Silicon Valley monopolies — Amazon, Google and Apple — abruptly united to remove Parler from the internet, exactly at the moment when it became the most-downloaded app in the country.

If one were looking for evidence to demonstrate that these tech behemoths are, in fact, monopolies that engage in anti-competitive behavior in violation of antitrust laws, and will obliterate any attempt to compete with them in the marketplace, it would be difficult to imagine anything more compelling than how they just used their unconstrained power to utterly destroy a rising competitor."

Glenn Greenwald


----------



## basilio (13 January 2021)

No Parler ? No Problemo !!

Just jump on the next  "far more secure" terrorist of choice network Telegram.  














						Pence says he won't invoke 25th amendment in letter to Pelosi - as it happened
					

Vice-president writes that removing Trump from office is not ‘in the best interest of our nation’ – follow live




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## rederob (13 January 2021)

dutchie said:


> Monopolies - don't you love them?
> 
> So good for our societies.
> 
> ...



Logically, 3 separate entities cannot each constitute a "*monopoly*"  wrt *Parler.  *
If that is indicative of Glenn Greenwald's thinking then his views cannot be reliable.


----------



## basilio (13 January 2021)

This story may be of interest to anyone or their friends who were active on Parlar.

*Every Deleted Parler Post, Many With Users' Location Data, Has Been Archived*

In the wake of the violent insurrection at the U.S. Capitol by scores of President Trump’s supporters, a lone researcher began an effort to catalogue the posts of social media users across Parler, a platform founded to provide conservative users a safe haven for uninhibited “free speech”  — but which ultimately devolved into a hotbed of far-right conspiracy theories, unchecked racism, and death threats aimed at prominent politicians.

The researcher, who asked to be referred to by her Twitter handle, @donk_enby, began with the goal of archiving every post from January 6, the day of the Capitol riot; what she called a bevy of “very incriminating” evidence. According to the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, among other sources, Parler is one of a several apps used by the insurrections to coordinate their breach of the Capitol, in a plan to overturn the 2020 election results and keep Donald Trump in power.

... Operating on little sleep, @donk_enby began the work of archiving all of Parler’s posts, ultimately capturing around 99.9 percent of its content. In a tweet early Sunday, @donk_enby said she was crawling some 1.1 million Parler video URLs. “These are the original, unprocessed, raw files as uploaded to Parler with all associated metadata,” she said. Included in this data tranche, now more than 56 terabytes in size, @donk_enby confirmed that the raw video files include GPS metadata pointing to exact locations of where the videos were taken.









						Every Deleted Parler Post, Many With Users' Location Data, Has Been Archived
					

In the wake of the violent insurrection at the U.S. Capitol by scores of President Trump’s supporters, a lone researcher began an effort to catalogue the posts of social media users across Parler, a platform founded to provide conservative users a safe haven for uninhibited “free speech”  — but...




					gizmodo.com


----------



## dutchie (13 January 2021)

rederob said:


> Logically, 3 separate entities cannot each constitute a "*monopoly*"  wrt *Parler.  *
> If that is indicative of Glenn Greenwald's thinking then his views cannot be reliable.



Your right, he should have called it a oligopoly.

Oligolopies - don't you love them.
So good for our societies.


----------



## basilio (13 January 2021)

Dutchie. I remembered you noted that on one who has been charged with attacking the Capitol building had a Parlar account.

That may change very quickly.


*Parler Users Breached Deep Inside U.S. Capitol Building, GPS Data Shows*

Dell Cameron
and Dhruv Mehrotra
Today 2:45PM
•
Filed to:The Capitol Mob

https://gizmodo.com/parler-users-breached-deep-inside-u-s-capitol-building-1846042905#replies
Graphic: Dhruv Mehrota / Gizmodo

At least several users of the far-right social network Parler appear to be among the horde of rioters that managed to penetrate deep inside the U.S. Capitol building and into areas normally restricted to the public, according to GPS metadata linked to videos posted to the platform the day of the insurrection in Washington.

... According to @donk_enby, more than 99% of all Parler posts, including millions of videos bearing the locations of users, were saved. *Unlike most of its competitors, Parler apparently had no mechanism in place to strip sensitive metadata from its users’ videos prior to posting them online. *









						Parler Users Breached Deep Inside U.S. Capitol Building, GPS Data Shows
					

At least several users of the far-right social network Parler appear to be among the hoard of rioters that managed to penetrate deep inside the U.S. Capitol building and into areas normally restricted to the public, according to GPS metadata.




					gizmodo.com


----------



## basilio (13 January 2021)

The meta data , video files and information  downloaded from Parlar is now in the public domain.


----------



## bellenuit (14 January 2021)

New ad from The Lincoln Project

https://t.co/iNGD0XSpv2


----------



## dutchie (14 January 2021)

Hypocrisy abounds


----------



## Knobby22 (14 January 2021)

Oh well, maybe he is the living incarnation of Mother Theresa in your eyes but in truth what matters now is what the elected Republicans think. 

To make sure he doesn't run again, 17 of the senate Republicans need to uphold the impeachment and convict.

From what I have seen its very close.

In reality the Democrats are politically stupid impeaching the Trumpster. Let him run again and show heaps of clips of his low life supporters bashing the cops and wearing pro holocaust t-shirts.
Biden will be a one termer but if Trump runs again just about anyone will best him. 

Also, 3 covid deaths a minute at present in the USA.

The Republicans need to take back their morals and their party.


----------



## DB008 (14 January 2021)




----------



## Knobby22 (14 January 2021)

Time I stopped and concentrated on other things. Will revisit in a month.


----------



## moXJO (15 January 2021)

basilio said:


> *"The heart of the message is correct "* That message was Arnies concern that the events  at the Capitol were a destruction of the principles democracy was based on. He also  excoriated  the politicians who supported the mob attack and saw them as culpable as Trump in promoting the lies about election outcome.  It has been these lies which have been used to drive this ongoing attack on the legitimacy of the Biden government.
> 
> So if we agree on the heart of the message we at least have reached the first step.




Better back up then to the ground level. Because I took away that democracy and the US would not only endure, but strengthen during such times.


----------



## basilio (15 January 2021)

moXJO said:


> Better back up then to the ground level. Because I took away that democracy and the US would not only endure, but strengthen during such times.




I think that was the "Hollywood BS" you originally tagged his speech as .

In any case Arnie was quite clear that saving the US democracy after the insurrection at the Capital was contingent on identifying and dealing with the politicians and people who tried to overthrow Congress. Arnie wouldn't countenance just pretending nothing seriously bad had happened and whistling sweet tunes.
..............................................................................
Apropos to the ongoing investigation.

Speaking  hypothetically , what should be the consequences if current serving politicans are  found to have been  supporting and planning the break in to the Capitol ?  For instance if they provided information to the insurrectionists on  the layout of building and where they could locate particular people ?


----------



## dutchie (22 January 2021)

Google is much worse than China. Being bullies again (because they can).

*Google is accused of 'blackmail' as it threatens to remove search function in Australia if law forcing it to pay media companies for content is passed*


*Regulator found a power imbalance between media and Google and Facebook *
*Australian government wants to pass a new law to force Google to pay for news *
*Google has threatened to leave the Australian market if the code goes ahead*
*Director Mel Silva said the code presented an 'untenable' risk to its business *









						Google threatens to remove its search function in Australia
					

A proposed law, introduced to Parliament in December, will force Facebook and Google to negotiate fees with news companies whose stories appear on their platforms.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Australian regulators found that for every $100 spent on digital advertising, $53 goes to Google, $28 to Facebook and only $19 goes to others.  
*Way too monopolistic.*


----------



## SirRumpole (22 January 2021)

Cancel culture strikes again.









						Victorian, WA premiers criticise decision to give Margaret Court top Australia Day honour
					

Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews and WA's Mark McGowan say they do not support former tennis great Margaret Court being recognised with an Australia Day honour because of her "disgraceful, hurtful" views about the LGBT community.




					www.abc.net.au
				




When some of the petals protesting about Maggie do as much for the sport and for women in general as she has, maybe they can talk. Until then ...


----------



## wayneL (22 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Cancel culture strikes again.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm getting pretty uncomfortable with the way politicians and supposed journalists are eviscerating members of the public, even if they are public figures, for their opinions (unless those opinions are for the purpose of inciting violence)

It's almost getting a bit like Orwell's two minutes of hate in Nineteeneightyfour, and really not what I would think is healthy in a purported Liberal democracy.

Probably almost all of us here would find much disagreement with the opinions of Margaret Court. There are many opinions of Martin Luther King Jr for which I profoundly disagree with also, but nobody can take away the profundity of the "I have a dream" speech.

It should be this that he is remembered by, not differences of political opinion. Likewise Margaret courts achievements in tennis cannot be erased by those opinions of her with which we might disagree.


----------



## ghotib (22 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> When some of the petals protesting about Maggie do as much for the sport and for women in general as she has, maybe they can talk. Until then ...



Huh???

She had a spectacular tennis career, but that alone doesn't necessarily serve (sorry!) the sport. Arguably her dominance was so great that she harmed the sport. She founded and still preaches at a pentecostal church whose website says nothing to suggest any particular services to women, but which contains several variations on its vision to: 


> ... train an army who knows Christ from within, to take this city and nation for Jesus.



I'm sure that Margaret Court's army is metaphorical, not literal. OTOH, recent events in the US strongly suggest that metaphors need to be treated with caution.  

According to the SMH the award is for her service as a player and as a mentor to young sportspeople. The website has several visions for young people, but I don't see anything particular to sportspeople, young or old. 

In my view:
1.  Australia Day awards, like their British predecessors, are pretty silly.
2. If the citation reported in the SMH is complete and correct, objecting to the award because of her stated beliefs about other matters is pretty petty.
3. If the reported citation is complete and correct *and* if her services to the game and to young sportspeople are as shown on her church website, then  the award is not justified.
4.  See 1 above.


----------



## Ferret (22 January 2021)

I don't get this either.

She has already been awarded companion of the order of Australia, I assume for he tennis accomplishments.  

What has she done since that warrants another award?


----------



## SirRumpole (7 March 2021)

Ahead of the National Museum of Australia's 20th birthday this week, the building's architect has only now revealed the level of government anger that was ignited over a secret political message emblazoned onto its walls.

One man's "Sorry".​








						Howard nearly got away with his protest, until an eagle-eyed engineer decoded the writing on the wall
					

Ahead of the National Museum of Australia's 20th birthday, the building's architect reveals the full extent of the Howard government's anger in reaction to a secret political message he emblazoned onto its walls.




					www.abc.net.au


----------



## SirRumpole (29 March 2021)

Sacked for having an opinion.

What is this country coming to ?









						Adelaide radio host sacked over 'silly little girl who got drunk' comments about Brittany Higgins
					

One of Adelaide's longest-serving and most controversial radio hosts no longer has a job after calling alleged rape victim Brittany Higgins "a silly little girl who got drunk".




					www.abc.net.au


----------



## sptrawler (30 March 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Sacked for having an opinion.
> 
> What is this country coming to ?
> 
> ...



It certainly is getting out of control, it wont be long before people will be scared to say anything that hasn't already been voiced in the media and therefore been given the o.k.

Big Brother is coming, but it isn't manifesting in the way everyone thought, mind/opinion control by media is the way it is coming IMO


----------



## rederob (30 March 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Sacked for having an opinion.
> 
> What is this country coming to ?
> 
> ...



There is a considerable difference between expressing your opinions to acquaintances, and broadcasting them by via media.
In this case the "opinion" is actionable and leaves the broadcaster wide open to defamation, irrespective of their retraction and the sacking.
Getting drunk is not an invitation to be raped, which seems to be what Cordeaux thinks.

In the event action is taken against the radio station, their quick response to terminate Cordeaux and apologise unreservedly would serve to reduce any damages claim.


----------



## sptrawler (30 March 2021)

rederob said:


> There is a considerable difference between expressing your opinions to acquaintances, and broadcasting them by via media.
> In this case the "opinion" is actionable and leaves the broadcaster wide open to defamation, irrespective of their retraction and the sacking.
> Getting drunk is not an invitation to be raped, which seems to be what Cordeaux thinks.
> 
> In the event action is taken against the radio station, their quick response to terminate Cordeaux and apologise unreservedly would serve to reduce any damages claim.



I don't think he said 'she invited rape', it just shows how things get misinterpreted, it is an alleged rape at the moment..
That is what the courts will test.
As for mitigating damage, the radio station had no option in the current climate, many decisions are being made to mitigate risk surrounding these issues ATM . IMO


----------



## rederob (30 March 2021)

sptrawler said:


> I don't think he said 'she invited rape', it just shows how things get misinterpreted, it is an alleged rape at the moment..
> That is what the courts will test.
> As for mitigating damage, the radio station had no option in the current climate, many decisions are being made to mitigate risk surrounding these issues ATM . IMO



Cordeaux broadcast statements which are directly linked, and *name *Higgins.  The defamatory inference is crystal clear.
How you arrive at a *misinterpretation* is interesting.
Furthermore, if the radio station believed Cordeaux's comments were ok, they could have chosen to take no action.


----------



## sptrawler (30 March 2021)

rederob said:


> Cordeaux broadcast statements which are directly linked, and *name *Higgins.  The defamatory inference is crystal clear.
> How you arrive at a *misinterpretation* is interesting.
> Furthermore, if the radio station believed Cordeaux's comments were ok, they could have chosen to take no action.



If the defamatory statement is clear, you would quote it, as usual you haven't.
You said:
"*Getting drunk is not an invitation to be raped, which seems to be what Cordeaux thinks*".
I didn't  think he inferred that, I thought he inferred a young lady getting drunk to the point of being not in control of her faculties, is a very silly and dangerous situation to put themselves in and I agree.
A persons judgement being that far affected is dangerous in every sense of the word, be it in a car, walking down streets, accompanying other people etc, you are relying on the moral behaviour, driving ability etc of other people.
You may think that isn't silly, but i wouldn't be happy if one of my daughters got herself that drunk she, didn't know what she was doing.
I don't believe for one minute there aren't ill intentioned people out there, but obviously there are people that think nothing bad will happen, because we say it shouldn't. 
It would be nice if there were no murders, no bashings, no rapes, no assaults etc, but that isn't the case, so unfortunately people do have to take responsibility and be mindful and careful not everyone is nice.
That is why we have prisons and courts and most are usually full.
Just my opinion, which always seems to differ from yours, but that's people we are all different.


----------



## wayneL (21 June 2021)

Ok I want this discussion to transgress left/right politics, because it is not about that at all, however, I would like those of us with particular political positions to examine their biases in regards to this issue.

I'm talking about the arrest last week of the friendlyjordies producer.

Some of us have been very alarmed by the frequency of this sort of thing going on in our society, others have only just become aware of it... Or rather, that eventually it cuts both ways.

I don't mind saying that Jordan is completely on the opposite side of the political divide to me and I think he is a total tw@t. However I fully support his right to free speech and to apply the torch to politician's belly.

IMO, what has happened to Jordan's producer here is emblematic of the toxic totalitarianism that is creeping into our system. It is not exclusive to one side of politics, it is happening in lockstep with each other.

I don't know what individually any of us can do, but collectively we need to try to find a way to stop this creeping, but accelerating police statism. Vis a vis, we should reject to divide and rule paradigm that has been implemented.

But how?

A penny for your thoughts...


----------



## Knobby22 (21 June 2021)

wayneL said:


> Ok I want this discussion to transgress left/right politics, because it is not about that at all, however, I would like those of us with particular political positions to examine their biases in regards to this issue.
> 
> I'm talking about the arrest last week of the friendlyjordies producer.
> 
> ...




Interesting.
I saw Kevin Rudd is upset. https://www.crikey.com.au/2021/06/21/kevin-rudd-defence-fund-friendlyjordies/
Will watch video later and do some reading.
What happened to that poor Liberal woman who quit due to constant attacks even extending to trashing her offices means there has to be some protection though. This however may be an abuse of power.


----------



## moXJO (21 June 2021)

This has been pretty big the last few weeks.  
Guy is a pretentious d1ck and has been pushing for an outcome and got it.

 Barra took the bait and overstepped the mark. Barra is in the wrong. He should of just sent some angry Italians around and broke the guys kneecaps like the unions do.


This sht has gone on for a long time. Guys in power can bone you multiple ways. I'm surprised he went the police route.  Hope he gets the sack.


----------



## Smurf1976 (21 June 2021)

wayneL said:


> IMO, what has happened to Jordan's producer here is emblematic of the toxic totalitarianism that is creeping into our system. It is not exclusive to one side of politics, it is happening in lockstep with each other.




Rather a lot of people are speaking out about this now.

Like this guy who isn't someone you'd expect to comment. For those unfamiliar, he normally comments about cars not politics or arrests:


----------



## SirRumpole (21 June 2021)

So what has the arrested person been charged with ?


----------



## rederob (22 June 2021)

wayneL said:


> Ok I want this discussion to transgress left/right politics, because it is not about that at all, however, I would like those of us with particular political positions to examine their biases in regards to this issue.



This is a straight out legal matter where a politician in power has used an inappropriate Act and his apparent command over a Counter Terrorism force to silence his detractors.
As the video link points out there are also grave errors of fact in relation to the apprehension, aside from questions over when, where and how the apprehension was authorised.
First, the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence Act) 2007 is in place, unsurprisingly, to protect vulnerable people from *violence *by catching perpetrators who stalk or intimidate.  It is an abuse of the courts to use this Act to silence speech (as the unusual bail conditions clearly set out).
Second is the use of a Counter Terrorism force, rather than police acting on complaint after examining the evidence.
Third is the apprehension itself - its method and the actions of persons involved, including the unambiguously false information they apparently relied on.
Jordan rightly invokes using ICAC to examine this affair.
ICAC is principally concerned with *corrupt conduct* which in part is defined as when:

a public official improperly uses, or tries to improperly use, the knowledge, power or resources of their position for personal gain or the advantage of others
The political persuasion of the instigator is irrelevant.  It is their actions that now need to be brought to account.


----------



## basilio (22 June 2021)

rederob said:


> This is a straight out legal matter where a politician in power has used an inappropriate Act and his apparent command over a Counter Terrorism force to silence his detractors.
> As the video link points out there are also grave errors of fact in relation to the apprehension, aside from questions over when, where and how the apprehension was authorised.
> First, the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence Act) 2007 is in place, unsurprisingly, to protect vulnerable people from *violence *by catching perpetrators who stalk or intimidate.  It is an abuse of the courts to use this Act to silence speech (as the unusual bail conditions clearly set out).
> Second is the use of a Counter Terrorism force, rather than police acting on complaint after examining the evidence.
> ...




Terrifying.. About as totalitarian as one can get.  Redrobs analysis of this travesty is spot on.
The solution ?

Lets bring back  Peter Dutton, Christian Porter and Barnaby Joyce as staunch supporters individual democratic rights.


----------



## wayneL (22 June 2021)

wayneL said:


> Ok I *don't* want this discussion to transgress left/right politics, because it is not about that at all, however, I would like those of us with particular political positions to examine their biases in regards to this issue....
> 
> ...Vis a vis, we should reject to divide and rule paradigm that has been implemented.



I realised I made a mistake in my post, correction bolded.

...and I am quoting myself, what I thought was a pretty important point which may have been missed.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 June 2021)

wayneL said:


> I realised I made a mistake in my post, correction bolded.
> 
> ...and I am quoting myself, what I thought was a pretty important point which may have been missed.




At least NSW has an ICAC, it will be interesting to see if they take up the case.

Use of taxpayer's resources to solve a personal problem could be considered corrupt.


----------



## moXJO (22 June 2021)

It was definitely overreach. Will be interesting to see where it goes. 

One problem for the FJordies is their track record on abusing people and using their rabid followers to attack. Journalists are often in his sights.
His racism is an afterthought. 

It seems this is the latest incarnation of political influencing. Very surprised the left jumped on with this racist. Yet vilified Tommy Robinson when he was jailed. 

I think there is a case against jordies. Also that barilaro has a lot to answer for.


----------



## Knobby22 (22 June 2021)

moXJO said:


> It was definitely overreach. Will be interesting to see where it goes.
> 
> One problem for the FJordies is their track record on abusing people and using their rabid followers to attack. Journalists are often in his sights.
> His racism is an afterthought.
> ...



Tommy Robinson was in the UK though. Need an Aussie example.


----------



## wayneL (22 June 2021)

Knobby22 said:


> Tommy Robinson was in the UK though. Need an Aussie example.



Avi Yemeni has been arrested several times in Victoria.


----------



## moXJO (22 June 2021)

Knobby22 said:


> Tommy Robinson was in the UK though. Need an Aussie example.



They all seem to be click driven on outrage. They push to a point until they get a result. Fans biases are confirmed as they all circle jerk one another off in echo chamber ecstasy. 

This time the guy is actually a Labor boot licker. It smells like getup or similar. This guy had his nose up Kristina Keneally arse. I mean if you want the poodle of corruption while accusing others....
seems like an astroturfing rather than grassroots. Latest political ploy in engaging the youth. 

Stick your finger up to all of them youngings.


----------



## Smurf1976 (22 June 2021)

moXJO said:


> It seems this is the latest incarnation of political influencing. Very surprised the left jumped on with this racist. Yet vilified Tommy Robinson when he was jailed.



Freedom of speech is your right to say things others disagree with without suffering undue consequences.

Due consequences = everyone knows what you think and judges you accordingly.

Undue consequences = you're arrested.

In practice rather a lot will say they support it but in truth what they really support is your right to agree with them which by its very nature isn't actual free speech at all.

The Left tend to get fired up about those who say things the Left strongly opposes. All of a sudden "free speech" is forgotten and out come the cries that what they're saying mustn't be said for whatever reason they can come up with.  

The Right takes a different tactic and uses intimidation and legal processes. Eg get a private investigator to follow someone for months, put them through the courts over all sorts of frivolous matters and so on.

Both extremes are terrible.


----------



## rederob (23 June 2021)

Smurf1976 said:


> Freedom of speech is your right to say things others disagree with without suffering undue consequences.



We don't have freedom of speech in Australia and we do not have a Bill of Rights.
What we can say is conditioned by our laws, even when we present honest *opinion *and believe we are telling the truth (as in defamation cases).
We could be more liberal and adopt somethin akin to the US system whereby lying seems to be a daily part of life, or the Chinese system where telling an everyday truth can land you in jail.
I personally believe our middle path is a better compromise.
In Australia we are largely protected in what we say privately, but when in public or using any form of media, we leave ourselves open to challenge, no matter how trivial.  That includes everything each of us post in this forum.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 June 2021)

rederob said:


> What we can say is conditioned by our laws, even when we present honest *opinion *and believe we are telling the truth (as in defamation cases).




Honest opinion is a defense in defamation cases.


----------



## rederob (23 June 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Honest opinion is a defense in defamation cases.



A defense is not a guarantee against being sued, nor of winning a case.
And in another thread @Joe Blow has quantified his *costs *of successfully defending a defamation case, and I think to this day has not got anything back.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 June 2021)

rederob said:


> A defense is not a guarantee against being sued, nor of winning a case.
> And in another thread @Joe Blow has quantified his *costs *of successfully defending a defamation case, and I think to this day has not got anything back.




But its part of our "middle path", which you said you support.

If you think it can be improved you are free to say so.


----------



## wayneL (23 June 2021)

rederob said:


> We don't have freedom of speech in Australia and we do not have a Bill of Rights.
> What we can say is conditioned by our laws, even when we present honest *opinion *and believe we are telling the truth (as in defamation cases).
> We could be more liberal and adopt somethin akin to the US system whereby lying seems to be a daily part of life, or the Chinese system where telling an everyday truth can land you in jail.
> I personally believe our middle path is a better compromise.
> In Australia we are largely protected in what we say privately, but when in public or using any form of media, we leave ourselves open to challenge, no matter how trivial.  That includes everything each of us post in this forum.



We do want to guard what rights of speech we do have, however. In other parts of the Anglosphere like the UK, and most especially Scotland, it is aggressively being legislated away.

The line of what is considered "hate speech" is perilously close to normal robust debate. Additionally, this legislative overreach is encroaching into one's own home.

We don't want that here.


----------



## rederob (23 June 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> But its part of our "middle path", which you said you support.
> 
> If you think it can be improved you are free to say so.



I definitely said it was a "compromise".
I believe there needs to be better protections for people who are clearly expressing in public opinions which can be reasonably derived.  
I also believe that whistleblower and public interest legislation needs to be beefed up.
Furthermore, I believe there needs to be a circuit breaker before matters of "opinion" are deemed necessary for courts to settle.
Finally, I believe it would work better if the courts did two things;

Levy a fine (in addition to any other penalty) on a party who knowingly brought frivolous or inappropriate matters for adjudication; and 
Place the onus on the State to recover costs and damages from the losing party.
As matters stand you need to be wealthy to continue claims and recover costs/damages.  This is beyond the average wage and salary earner's capacity.  Or most independent journalists.


----------



## rederob (23 June 2021)

wayneL said:


> We don't want that here.



Agreed, and it's why whenever possible I vote for independent candidates who have a track record (or platform) of fighting injustices.


----------



## Joe Blow (23 June 2021)

rederob said:


> I definitely said it was a "compromise".
> I believe there needs to be better protections for people who are clearly expressing in public opinions which can be reasonably derived.
> I also believe that whistleblower and public interest legislation needs to be beefed up.
> Furthermore, I believe there needs to be a circuit breaker before matters of "opinion" are deemed necessary for courts to settle.
> ...




I would also add, if those commencing litigation of this kind (especially long running litigation) who, upon losing the litigation, are subsequently found to have no assets in their own name but are a beneficiary of a discretionary trust, then the assets of that trust should be used to satisfy any adverse costs order against them.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 June 2021)

rederob said:


> Levy a fine (in addition to any other penalty) on a party who knowingly brought frivolous or inappropriate matters for adjudication; and




Should also be applied to those who spread fake news or misrepresent real people using technology.


----------



## sptrawler (23 June 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Honest opinion is a defense in defamation cases.



Exactly Rumpy, there is a difference between an opinion and a statement of fact, that is why I try to differentiate when I post.
It also IMO, is why the media is getting into so much trouble, they write or present most stories as statement of fact, when in most cases they are just a collection of opinions that supports their belief or supports the underlying agenda they are trying to push.
If the media put a caveat on articles they present, that this is only my opinion, they would soon have the general public seeing it as a cartoon show, which is the way I see it. 😂


----------



## Smurf1976 (23 June 2021)

rederob said:


> We don't have freedom of speech in Australia and we do not have a Bill of Rights.



Whilst true, I'd argue that most things in society exist not because government said they shall exist but rather because government hasn't said they must not exist. Not legally perhaps but in practice that's true - this forum exists not because government said it must exist but rather, because government hasn't said it can't exist. 

Freedom of speech ought to be a protected right in my view though certainly and, more to the point here, any proven instance of corruption or misuse of power by Members of Parliament ought have a mandatory minimum penalty attached.


----------



## rederob (23 June 2021)

Smurf1976 said:


> Freedom of speech ought to be a protected right in my view though certainly and, more to the point here, any proven instance of corruption or misuse of power by Members of Parliament ought have a mandatory minimum penalty attached.



I cannot agree with your ideas about free speech.
I do not believe you or anyone can say whatever they like in public without repercussions.
You have a right to truths about yourself that others should not be able to wilfully override because they believe their rights are greater!
Or as I consider my right to fresh air and its health benefit is greater than that of someone who chooses to pollute it for their own pleasure at my cost.


----------



## Smurf1976 (23 June 2021)

rederob said:


> I do not believe you or anyone can say whatever they like in public without repercussions.



The trouble is, silencing dissent is the way to stop progress in practice.

Pretty much all social change comes about because a minority, who by definition do not have mainstream support at the time, speak out against the mainstream view with an expectation that whilst others may not agree with what they have to say, they'll suffer no undue consequences from saying it.

If today's ideas of silencing dissent had been deemed acceptable over the past half century then almost certainly 2021 would look a lot more like 1970. We'd still be doing what the Church says we must do, we'd have trashed every last piece of wilderness and we'd probably still have racist jokes on mainstream TV as well.

Social progress happens because society allows minorities, who by definition are not supported by most, to express their views without undue consequence. By doing so it raises awareness of the points they raise, rational people consider the idea and, if it has merit, in due course it gains support.

An example of that from the past is the idea that the natural environment has any value other than that of the natural resources able to be extracted from it. The point was made, the media reported the news, rational people considered the idea and in due course society's attitudes slowly but surely changed. Very few would today argue that the only value of wilderness is measured in terms of the minerals, timber or water resources within it.

A more recent example is that there's some reason why the 26th of January is a day not to be celebrated. Again a radical idea being raised but people raise their concerns without undue consequence, the media reports the news, rational people consider the merits of the point being made and if deemed worthy it gains traction. My guess is we'll see that one changed in due course because of that, an idea is being raised and many are seeing it to have merit.

As I see it, you're basically arguing to entrench conservatism and stop social progress. That's the natural outcome if dissenting views at odds with mainstream conventional wisdom are able to be silenced.

You do of course in my opinion have a right to express that view.....


----------



## SirRumpole (24 June 2021)

Smurf1976 said:


> The trouble is, silencing dissent is the way to stop progress in practice.
> 
> Pretty much all social change comes about because a minority, who by definition do not have mainstream support at the time, speak out against the mainstream view with an expectation that whilst others may not agree with what they have to say, they'll suffer no undue consequences from saying it.
> 
> ...




I certainly agree with your sentiments based on free discussion of issues, the difficulty arises when groups of people are verbally attacked on the grounds of perceived 'weaknesses' arising from racial or social characteristics, ie how far does society let those attacks go without disrupting the general peace ?

I'm disturbed by the 'cancel culture' that exists around criticism of certain religions or races where these groups seem to be a protected species immune from criticism simply on the grounds that they are a minority, but I'm also disturbed by far Right Wing groups that stir up hatred based on the grounds that minorities must conform to our expectations of social behaviour.

Where is the borderline between legitimate opinion and hate ? Is there one ? Should we try to legislate away bigotry or simply rely on the commonsense of the 'majority' to ignore it ? My preference is for the latter, but on the other hand as you pointed out , majorities are not always right.

It's a fine line and I don't have all the answers but I think we are being unduly constrained by the 'Left' on one hand from legitimate debate (see the Israel Folau case) and by the 'Right' on the other hand as witnessed by the treatment of whistleblowers by the current Federal government and the jackboot mentality of some in the NSW government.

We can only hope that genuine liberalism and goodwill prevails.


----------



## rederob (24 June 2021)

Smurf1976 said:


> The trouble is, silencing dissent is the way to stop progress in practice.



This is a very small element of so called *free speech,* and I am not aware of it being *silenced *_per se_.  People are able to disagree, but there may come a time where their views are proven unsound and their voices thereafter have little traction. 


Smurf1976 said:


> If today's ideas of silencing dissent had been deemed acceptable over the past half century then almost certainly 2021 would look a lot more like 1970. We'd still be doing what the Church says we must do, we'd have trashed every last piece of wilderness and we'd probably still have racist jokes on mainstream TV as well.



I have no idea what you mean when you say "today's ideas of silencing dissent".
However,  I believe you are using a generalisation that is far removed from how progress has occurred in the fields you mention. For example, Bob Brown was never *silenced*.  Governments used used their respective powers to prevent protesters from stopping what the majority of voters wanted.  Bob Brown has been repeatedly (and to this day!) faced criminal charges for what he *did *rather than what he said.


Smurf1976 said:


> As I see it, you're basically arguing to entrench conservatism and stop social progress.



No.  You have created a straw man. 
Moreover, you have not shown that those proposing social change have actually been *silenced*.


Smurf1976 said:


> That's the natural outcome if dissenting views at odds with mainstream conventional wisdom are able to be silenced.



I think you have missed the point of the discussion about "free speech"_ per se._

I believe a better example would be Peter Ridd's case. Peter Ridd lost his job over his comments about science relating to the Great Barrier Reef. One could argue his employer attempted to silence him by sacking him. While that remains a moot point point, Peter Ridd need not be employed by JCU in order to make his claims. So there is often a context to where free speech sits in Australia so that there is no repercussion.


----------



## Knobby22 (28 June 2021)

Here's the Tazzy version, found guilty today. 9 months prison.
He seems to be a sandwich short of a picnic.









						'Self-styled journalist' and convicted conman jailed over videos about Liberal MP
					

A YouTuber and "self-employed journalist" is sentenced to nine months in prison after he published defamatory videos about a senior Tasmanian government minister.




					www.abc.net.au


----------



## moXJO (28 June 2021)

Knobby22 said:


> Here's the Tazzy version, found guilty today. 9 months prison.
> He seems to be a sandwich short of a picnic.
> 
> 
> ...



I'm not sure who is lower on the scum scale. Journos or pollies. May they sue one another into oblivion.


----------



## basilio (29 June 2021)

This "Post Truth" world is a doozy isn't it ?    Free speech ? Dissent ? The right to "Believe what we Want" ?

And then we reach the levels of the  Sandy Hook massacre being a covert op. That the world is run by pedophile, shape changing, lizard people.  That the earth is flat or hollow. hat the moon landings were faked.  That millions and millions of people passionately  believe these  sorts of ideas* or allow them to continue because they support their general political/social views. *

I'm not sure where this stands in the range of conspiracy theories but the "Birds aren't Real" movement does bring another dimension to the conversation.

*That's right. There are no real birds in the sky folks.  *What we see flying around are actually  high sophisticated CIA surveillance drones.

It's on the net.  There are hundreds of thousands of "believers "  (Maybe ) Lot's of merchandising as well. And the back story is to die for. If you a Sandy Hook aficionado,  if  Q Anon seems pretty reasonable  etc etc perhaps this is the  theory that brings it all together.









						THE HISTORY
					

WARNING: DISTURBING CONTENT   The only way to properly explain, is with words.   Chapter 1: Why?               When asked to write the unabridged history of this organization, I was taken aback. I knew that I had reached many thousands in my quest to spread the truth, but I was bewildered and...



					birdsarentreal.com
				











						Frequently Asked Questions - Birds Aren't Real
					

What is this movement's purpose? When did it start? Why are birds not real? Learn answers to these questions plus news from the Birds Aren't Real Movement here.



					birdsarentreal.com
				











						‘The Birds Aren’t Real’ movement says federal government replaced all birds with surveillance drones
					

There is no scientific evidence to suggest that birds aren’t real. But the truther movement “Birds Aren’t Real” isn’t quitting — in fact they’re just getting started. Springfield, Mo., wa…




					thehill.com


----------



## rederob (29 June 2021)

basilio said:


> This "Post Truth" world is a doozy isn't it ?    Free speech ? Dissent ? The right to "Believe what we Want" ?
> 
> And then we reach the levels of the  Sandy Hook massacre being a covert op. That the world is run by pedophile, shape changing, lizard people.  That the earth is flat or hollow. hat the moon landings were faked.  That millions and millions of people passionately  believe these  sorts of ideas* or allow them to continue because they support their general political/social views. *
> 
> ...



West Australians have been spreading the truth that there are no birds for over 60 years @basilio, so please stop spouting conspiracy theories about conspiracy theories.


----------



## Smurf1976 (1 July 2021)

rederob said:


> I have no idea what you mean when you say "today's ideas of silencing dissent".
> However, I believe you are using a generalisation that is far removed from how progress has occurred in the fields you mention. For example, Bob Brown was never *silenced*. Governments used used their respective powers to prevent protesters from stopping what the majority of voters wanted. Bob Brown has been repeatedly (and to this day!) faced criminal charges for what he *did *rather than what he said.



Using the Bob Brown example, Bob has throughout his political career (either as an actual MP or an activist) pursued a range of issues.

Some of those issues had strong public support right from the start.

Some of those issues had very significant numbers on both sides such that any claim for either having a majority was a "technical" one of scraping in over 50% but with plenty on both sides.

Some had clear public opposition.

Bob himself did, after all, once note that democracy would have to be suspended in order to win certain battles. In other words, the public wasn't on side and he knew it. That's his observation at the time not mine.

That he wasn't silenced is the point however.

If someone were to apply modern thinking to all of Bob's campaigns over the years well then I'm very sure they could find comments or views that would fall victim to the whole "cancel culture" type thinking prevalent today.

Bob's dislike of foreign owned companies could, for example, be argued as racist if someone was looking for a reason to silence him. Probably not his intent but someone could interpret it that way if they were looking to find a problem.

His attempt to shut down various industries could be seen as a direct attack on those who'd be put out of work by doing so. Putting someone out of a job's going to have a somewhat larger impact on them than simply calling them names after all, it's a fair bit worse than anything that words alone can do to someone. And yet today we do indeed shut people down for words alone.

His challenging of social norms at the time could, if someone wanted to, be seen as offensive. Mainstream society in the 1980's wasn't overly supportive of what was then termed gay rights for example.

Now to be clear I've no issue with Bob. On some issues I strongly agree with is views, on some I quite strongly disagree but I've no issue with him overall. He's made a contribution to society which exceeds that of most and I absolutely support that he has a right to have made the points he made, to have engaged in protests and so on. Just as those opposed also have a right to protest and make their point.

Modern standards would easily shut him down though and that is my point here. If we were arguing about that stuff today as new issues then the likes of Bob would very easily be silenced if someone wanted to.

Today we silence those who simply offend verbally. No need to put anyone out of a job or cause them any actual harm, just say something they deem offensive and you're done. Pretty much anyone will be tripped up on that if someone wants to.

For that matter well these days keeping someone quiet is as easy as just scheduling another press conference to clash with theirs. The ALP is well aware of that one because the federal government does it rather often - the ALP calls a press conference, someone starts speaking, then before they're a third of the way through there's a government one underway being shown live and that's it, done. That's one reason Labor has trouble getting their message out - the government quite literally cuts them off, a tactic that would have been considered totally unacceptable not that long ago.


----------



## rederob (1 July 2021)

Smurf1976 said:


> Modern standards would easily shut him down though and that is my point here. If we were arguing about that stuff today as new issues then the likes of Bob would very easily be silenced if someone wanted to.



You have not shown this is the case in any way shape form or fashion.


Smurf1976 said:


> Today we silence those who simply offend verbally. No need to put anyone out of a job or cause them any actual harm, just say something they deem offensive and you're done. Pretty much anyone will be tripped up on that if someone wants to.



Again, no demonstration that this occurs here... unless they are breaking laws we have previously covered in this thread.


Smurf1976 said:


> For that matter well these days keeping someone quiet is as easy as just scheduling another press conference to clash with theirs.



That is not keeping anyone *silent*!


Smurf1976 said:


> The ALP is well aware of that one because the federal government does it rather often - the ALP calls a press conference, someone starts speaking, then before they're a third of the way through there's a government one underway being shown live and that's it, done. That's one reason Labor has trouble getting their message out - the government quite literally cuts them off, a tactic that would have been considered totally unacceptable not that long ago.



I think you are confusing how people with power and influence can affect anyone's opportunity to send a message or otherwise inform, rather than their ability to say what they wish.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 July 2021)

rederob said:


> That is not keeping anyone *silent*!




Taking away someone's ability to get their message to the public is *effectively* silencing them !

eg if you were banned from this forum you could still keep tapping away at your computer but no one here could read what you wrote. Sure you could take your message elsewhere but a portion of your potential audience would have to suffer the absence of your wisdom.


----------



## rederob (1 July 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Taking away someone's ability to get their message to the public is *effectively* silencing them !
> 
> eg if you were banned from this forum you could still keep tapping away at your computer but no one here could read what you wrote. Sure you could take your message elsewhere but a portion of your potential audience would have to suffer the absence of your wisdom.



Really!
All you are doing is removing a platform that conferred an opportunity.
Most of us don't have the means or opportunity to have our thoughts broadcast unfettered.
Try getting your message - whatever it is - on television or into one of the nation's most read newspapers.
The fact that you cannot does not mean you are silenced.

Maybe we should be grateful to @Joe Blow for making his life a misery as we tribally war through our collective wisdom in the small fishbowl representing our universe?


----------



## wayneL (1 July 2021)

I think the point is, that although you are "technically" correct Rob, in practice, there are ways to effectively shut people up.

Sure, I can say anything I want while I'm sitting by myself on the bog, but I am forced to self-censor in the current public environment.

If Australia goes the way of say, Scotland, which is not beyond the realms of possibility, then we are in deep doo-doo.

To avoid this, we must ensure people have a platform(s) to speak and debate.


----------



## IFocus (1 July 2021)

I think in this current age there has never been more opportunity to broadcast your views hence all the nut case conspiracy theory's that take off, QAnon great example.

What can silence you is law and the real risk continues to be laws made up for the sake of so called national security.


----------



## Smurf1976 (2 July 2021)

wayneL said:


> I think the point is, that although you are "technically" correct Rob, in practice, there are ways to effectively shut people up.



This.

Apply today's environment to all manner of real, actual debates from the past and one or both sides could be shut down if someone so wished.

Take away their ability to use mainstream media or to occupy public spaces (eg for a rally) and they're not going to achieve overly much just chatting to their mates lamenting whatever situation they disagree with.

Go to the first meetings of any lobby group and pretty much the entire focus will be about how to get the message in the media. Anyone with contacts at any significant media organisation, or who otherwise knows how to get the issue covered, will immediately find themselves a "senior" person within that lobby group no matter who they are. Because everyone grasps that getting the message out is the key to all the rest, fail at that point and you won't achieve anything at all.

News Corp

Fairfax / Channel 9

ABC

Other commercial broadcast media especially talk radio

Mainstream social media especially Facebook

Between them they'll make or break you and each one you're not on cuts your reach and chance of success with whatever you're trying to do. 

If the media won't work with you then you've got a problem. If they won't use some creative license to make it look like the 50 people who turned up was a capacity crowd, if they won't give fair coverage of whatever your point is, well then you've got a problem getting your message across to the masses. 

A point often overlooked is that if you're trying to change mainstream opinion well the people you need to reach aren't those who turn up to your meetings or follow you on Facebook. No, the people you need to convince are the ones who are neutral or opposed but willing to hear and give consideration to ideas they disagree with. 

Those who are opposed and whose minds are closed you've no chance of convincing so don't waste your time on them.


----------



## rederob (2 July 2021)

Smurf1976 said:


> This.
> 
> Apply today's environment to all manner of real, actual debates from the past and one or both sides could be shut down if someone so wished.
> 
> ...



Again, all you are doing is reflecting the power of money and the media, and it has nothing to do with *free speech* _per se_.
None of your examples show that the ability to express an opinion are silenced.  Where and how your opinions are expressed in public are merely conditional.
If you want to have a wide audience for your opinions just use any of the many available social media platforms that a generation ago did not exist.


----------



## moXJO (2 July 2021)

We have people banned from entering this country because of their views. Be it rappers, self help gurus etc. And not because what they said was illegal.


----------



## rederob (2 July 2021)

moXJO said:


> We have people banned from entering this country because of their views. Be it rappers, self help gurus etc. And not because what they said was illegal.



So what?
Thousands of people wanting to come to Australia are denied visas each year.  The high profile denials are usually based on character grounds which is often as much about what they did as what they said.
In any case, we don't have a Bill of Rights and we never had unconstrained free speech.
I am not sure that adding to the list of nutjobs - ie. the likes of Clive Palmer - already preaching nonsense in this country is beneficial.


----------



## wayneL (2 July 2021)

^^^ Lovely self defeating argument. LMAO


----------



## Craton (2 July 2021)

Friendly Jordies FB update 29 June 2021


> A message from Xenophon Davis
> "Bail condition prohibiting Kristo from passing by Parliament House lifted. He can go to school without fear of arrest. Looking forward to receiving the police evidence in a few weeks time. Thanks ⁦
> @EKerkyasharian"


----------



## basilio (8 July 2021)

Here we are.

The golden opportunity for the Free and Fearless to have their own version of Twitter where the Trumpian calls can echo across the Great Plains of Freedom and support the American Dream..

_GETTR is a brand new social media platform founded on the principles of free speech, independent thought and rejecting political censorship and “cancel culture”. With best in class technology, our goal is to create a marketplace of ideas in order to share freedom and democracy around the world._

Gettr is off the ground.









						GETTR – Apps on Google Play
					

Marketplace of ideas




					play.google.com


----------



## basilio (9 July 2021)

basilio said:


> Here we are.
> 
> The golden opportunity for the Free and Fearless to have their own version of Twitter where the Trumpian calls can echo across the Great Plains of Freedom and support the American Dream..
> 
> ...




Just a few teething problems to overcome on a platform that attracts many colourful, creative characters  and demands a platform for free speech.

'Team Trump' launched its alternative social media site to fanfare. It looks like it's already failed​ABC Science
 / 
By technology reporter James Purtill
Posted Wed 7 Jul 2021 at 6:00amWednesday 7 Jul 2021 at 6:00am, updated Wed 7 Jul 2021 at 7:11amWednesday 7 Jul 2021 at 7:11am





 Within hours of its launch, Gettr was having moderation problems.
(Supplied: Gettr)
Share

It was billed as "Team Trump's" answer to the problem of getting booted off mainstream social media — a digital platform where inciting a mob to storm a national government building would not be a bannable offence.

But one week in and it seems that answer is more elusive than ever before.

Gettr (pronounced Getter) would be a "marketplace of ideas" free from "woke tyranny" where no-one would be banned for their views, its creators said, when launching the site last week.

It's since been flooded with so many imposter accounts, pr0n and anti-conservative memes that its stewards have done something they'd set out to subvert: censor.





 A Gettr promotional image showing a user named Cameron Miily actually uses a stock photo of a woman in Kazakhstan.
(Supplied: Gettr )

Even Australian MPs have been caught up — Peter Dutton's office said it's trying to get two profiles each claiming to belong to the Minister for Defence removed from the platform.

The site (its name apparently inspired by the words "getting together") now appears less like an alternative to Twitter and more like a murky world of make-believe and fancy dress, where every other account is selling commemorative MAGA coins or knock-off Viagra.









						Team Trump launched its own social media site a week ago. It's already falling apart
					

It was billed as "Team Trump's" answer to the problem of getting booted off mainstream social media. One week on, experts say it's already doomed to fail.




					www.abc.net.au


----------



## moXJO (9 July 2021)

basilio said:


> Just a few teething problems to overcome on a platform that attracts many colourful, creative characters  and demands a platform for free speech.
> 
> 'Team Trump' launched its alternative social media site to fanfare. It looks like it's already failed​ABC Science
> /
> ...



Welcome to 90s internet culture. 
God only knows what they thought was going to happen.


----------



## wayneL (9 July 2021)

Haven't been on Twitter lately have you bas, full of trolls, imposters and actual terrorist organisations, while ordinary folks just expressing  sane opinions get banned.... Not to mention the sitting president of the United States.

Try to get some intellectual balance in your life bro.


----------



## wayneL (15 July 2021)

What happened to the larrikin, anti-authoritarian Aussie?

True Blue is indeed "gone"?


----------



## SirRumpole (15 July 2021)

wayneL said:


> What happened to the larrikin, anti-authoritarian Aussie?




Priorities ?

I'd like to think we would all pull together in times of war, and covid is a war of sorts.

Lots of casualties anyway.

Put up the blackouts and look after each other seems the way to go.


----------



## greggles (15 July 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> I'd like to think we would all pull together in times of war, and covid is a war of sorts.
> 
> Lots of casualties anyway.




You mean like fighting each other in the aisles of supermarkets over toilet paper? That kind of pulling together?


----------



## SirRumpole (15 July 2021)

greggles said:


> You mean like fighting each other in the aisles of supermarkets over toilet paper? That kind of pulling together?




Nah, those people are assholes, but you get some of those in any crisis.

Like black marketeers and spivs in the last war.


----------



## basilio (15 July 2021)

Great turn of events on the Friendly Jordies front.  Crowd runding website has seen 24,000 people pony up $1m plus to ensure there is a proper legal defence against the defamation case.

Makes me wonder...

1) How much would Christian Porter raise  to defend his reputation ?
2) How much would be raised to support a public prosecution of Christian Porter over the alleged rape of  Kartherine Thornton ?









						Friendlyjordies raises $1m to defend John Barilaro defamation case
					

‘Tens of thousands of Australians’ donate money to YouTube personality Jordan Shanks in defamation action brought by NSW deputy premier




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## wayneL (15 July 2021)

basilio said:


> Great turn of events on the Friendly Jordies front.  Crowd runding website has seen 24,000 people pony up $1m plus to ensure there is a proper legal defence against the defamation case.
> 
> Makes me wonder...
> 
> ...



I guess that would depend how much the media has convinced people over porter's assumed innocence or guilt.

What I find an interesting observation is the difference in integrity between different camps.


----------



## wayneL (15 July 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Priorities ?
> 
> I'd like to think we would all pull together in times of war, and covid is a war of sorts.
> 
> ...



Pulling together is one thing, but giving in to tyranny without a whimper is quite another.


----------



## Knobby22 (15 July 2021)

wayneL said:


> Pulling together is one thing, but giving in to tyranny without a whimper is quite another.






wayneL said:


> Pulling together is one thing, but giving in to tyranny without a whimper is quite another.



Mate, doing your bit  wearing a mask and doing the QR codes to help tracing is not tyranny.
And if you think France is the bees knees for citizen behaviour, well I don't.


----------



## wayneL (15 July 2021)

Knobby22 said:


> Mate, doing your bit  wearing a mask and doing the QR codes to help tracing is not tyranny.
> And if you think France is the bees knees for citizen behaviour, well I don't.



The French are reacting to... Well you should at least acquaint yourself with their reasons, and I applaud them. BTW, msm is not reporting it but that's going on a hell of a lot more places than just France.

As far as QR codes and masks? How about extended lockdowns AKA house arrest. Browsing for shoes being a criminal offence, police brutality for Facebook posts, over-the-top and often unlawful enforcement of mask regulations.... Oh and how about vaccine passports and creating a medical apartheid, not being able to leave our own country or travel interstate... Plus a lot of other things that are coming down the sh¹t chute.

If that's not tyrrany, I don't know what is.... And of course it can be a whole lot worse.


----------



## wayneL (15 July 2021)

Aussies channeling the Gillet Jeunes. (Spelling?)


----------



## moXJO (16 July 2021)

Lockdowns are done imo. The public is to stretched to take much more. 

Last year we had Jobkeeper/seeker. So it was like a paid holiday. But things turn desperate when the gravy turns off. It's completely different this time round. NSW will be luck to hold the situation before sht really blows up.


----------



## Knobby22 (16 July 2021)

moXJO said:


> Lockdowns are done imo. The public is to stretched to take much more.
> 
> Last year we had Jobkeeper/seeker. So it was like a paid holiday. But things turn desperate when the gravy turns off. It's completely different this time round. NSW will be luck to hold the situation before sht really blows up.



Yea, won't be too many more.
Melbourne wouldn't have had their latest if it wasn't for the rule breakers in Sydney coming down in the delivery van.

They knew they were at risk of having it (lived in the red zone and a colleague had caught it),
1.They didn't get tested,
2. They didn't wear masks
3. They didn't use QR codes
4. They lied to the tracers.

Dane Swan, a footballer and small business owner  says they should be publicly shamed and locked up for life.
Selfish inconsiderate scum.


----------



## basilio (16 July 2021)

Actually this time the Feds and the State government are covering  at least some lost wages quite quickly as well as business support. Lets hope they get on top of the outbreak by Tuesday.  Certainly don't want to go down the NSW road

_What's in the COVID Disaster Payment?_​_Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews have reached an agreement which will see workers receive financial assistance if they are left substantially out of pocket by the state's latest five-day lockdown.

Under the agreement, Victorians will be eligible for a $600 COVID-19 disaster payment if they lose more than 20-hours of work due to the lockdown. Those who lose between eight and 20 hours of work will get $375.

The Federal Government will fund the payment in areas the Commonwealth Chief Medical Officer has declared a COVID-19 hotspot, while the state government would be responsible for the cost of payments to the rest of the state.

The Prime Minister and Federal Treasurer also said the Premier has agreed to provide "significant additional economic support for business", which it says ensures the financial burden is being shared across the two-levels of Government._


----------



## moXJO (16 July 2021)

Knobby22 said:


> Yea, won't be too many more.
> Melbourne wouldn't have had their latest if it wasn't for the rule breakers in Sydney coming down in the delivery van.
> 
> They knew they were at risk of having it (lived in the red zone and a colleague had caught it),
> ...



Sydney right now just does not give a fig, they are over it. Large groups of people have just said "stuff it don't care".

I don't think the $10000 liquid assets test for nsw has stopped so they can't get the payment yet till 3 weeks into lockdowns. 

Last year I thought scomo was doing pretty good. This year he has thoroughly botched it.


----------



## Knobby22 (16 July 2021)

moXJO said:


> Sydney right now just does not give a fig, they are over it. Large groups of people have just said "stuff it don't care".
> 
> I don't think the $10000 liquid assets test for nsw has stopped so they can't get the payment yet till 3 weeks into lockdowns.
> 
> Last year I thought scomo was doing pretty good. This year he has thoroughly botched it.



Sounds like you have the pulse. Deputy Premiers daughter fined.
I was singing Scomo's praises this time last year.


----------



## moXJO (16 July 2021)

Knobby22 said:


> I was singing Scomo's praises this time last year.



Not sure if I just haven't been watching, or the media isn't covering what he is saying. But it feels like he has been MIA these last few months. 
I think I glanced a possible Lotto style win for people getting vaccinated in the media.


----------



## Knobby22 (16 July 2021)

He is only reacting, not leading.


----------



## wayneL (16 July 2021)

Knobby22 said:


> He is only reacting, not leading.






Knobby22 said:


> He is only reacting, not leading.



Yeah! I have some suggestions how he could be a better leader.

1/ Arrest all state premiers and  banish them for a lengthy period to Christmas Island, perhaps forever but at least until they slavishly toe the pm's line. it should be a criminal offence for a state premier to be more authoritarian than a prime minister.

2/ Dissolve the federation, abolish the states and learn how Jinping installed himself as the leadership for life. Institute martial law, and issue Jack boots to all.

3/ Lockdown everybody forever, close or businesses (except of course, politicians, celebrities, footy players and multinational companies)

4/ Increase all fines for not wearing a stupid piece of ineffective cloth on your face to $1,000,000 or life imprisonment.

5/ Force everybody, regardless of medical status or misgivings of safety, to be administered experimental gene therapies. the military police should have the right to vent their totalitarian dreamings on the vaccine-hesitant... It would be easier for herr doktor to administer said gene therapy to the unconscious.

6/ Mandate the ABC to broadcast celebrities, sportspeople, and politicians living it up, restriction free, to increase the morale of the plebeians.

7/ Have nightly broadcasts from Der Fuhrer, Klaus Schwabb reminding us how happy we all are.

That's real leadership... Are you listening Scotty?


----------



## Knobby22 (16 July 2021)

Nah, not the Australian way + we have the Westminster system and Prime Ministers can't do that and don't want to anyway.
I would just like him to plan ahead a little more.
We will get there.


----------



## wayneL (16 July 2021)

Knobby22 said:


> Nah, not the Australian way + we have the Westminster system and Prime Ministers can't do that and don't want to anyway.



Indeed, which seems to be to a point many have forgotten.

The Greeks (quite ironically) seem to get it.... The plebeians anyway.


----------



## wayneL (16 July 2021)

Vive la liberté


----------



## wayneL (16 July 2021)

*Wonders if Carley will get a visit from the Stasi....


----------



## Smurf1976 (17 July 2021)

wayneL said:


> *Wonders if Carley will get a visit from the Stasi....





On one hand viruses are a reality and it was always going to backfire to have a world where someone can get from pretty much any place on the planet to any other place in less than 100 hours and in most situations considerably faster. From a purely medical perspective, that was always a house of cards bound to come crashing down at some point.

On the other hand, well our politicians have completely failed us in my view. If it were up to me, I'd take the PM plus all state Premiers, lock them physically in a single room, and inform them that nobody's coming out until they've got an _effective_ quarantine and vaccination program ready to start immediate implementation and into which all required resources will be put.

There's going to be many people in similar circumstances to Carley who are being outright ruined by this situation and who've been effectively abandoned by governments applying selective policies to who gets assisted and who doesn't, states locking out their own residents and so on. 

It's sowing the seeds of revolution if it continues too much longer........


----------



## Knobby22 (17 July 2021)

The partial lockdown in NSW is failing.
We know why.

There are no votes to be won letting the virus run rampant and leading to 1000s of deaths so Gladys has no choice! Hard lockdown. That is the reality.

The people who let her and all the business owners down will be the same people whinging about loss of freedom and still will do their best to damage the economy going forward by, in effect, aiding and abetting the enemy by encouraging its spread.

So raise the flag of liberty, don't wear masks, travel more than 5km, attend illegal activities/parties, don't use QR codes, don't get tested if sick or in a hotspot and maybe you can extend the lockdown by a few weeks or even months destroying businesses as you go.

Because in their venal nature they ignore the part within Greek philosophy where in civil society people need to act for the greater good sometimes.


----------



## moXJO (17 July 2021)

Unfortunately it's either lockdowns or vaccinations. Both are unpalatable to most libertarians.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 July 2021)

moXJO said:


> Both are unpalatable to most libertarians.




Death is fairly unpalatable too.


----------



## rederob (17 July 2021)

moXJO said:


> Unfortunately it's either lockdowns or vaccinations. Both are unpalatable to most libertarians.



Libertarians suffer the dilemma of negative rights wrt to vaccinations, as their belief that the state cannot mandate vaccinations is subsumed by ones right not to be harmed by the action of another.


----------



## wayneL (17 July 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Death is fairly unpalatable too.



Death is not the inevitable result, or even the likely result of SARS-cov2.

Take reasonable precautions, protect the vulnerable, get vaccinated if you want. Eschew hysteria and hysterical responses.


----------



## IFocus (17 July 2021)

None of this is new what works is very well understood the problems are only ever ideology and politics, throw in a touch of incompetence.


----------



## rederob (17 July 2021)

*When do vaccination levels start to make a real difference?*

*Covid: UK daily cases pass 50,000 for first time since January*
*








*


----------



## wayneL (18 July 2021)

This is happening all over France


----------



## wayneL (18 July 2021)

...and Greece


----------



## moXJO (18 July 2021)

A lot of businesses are going to keep working in spite of the nsw restrictions. To many are too far stretched and employees can't afford to not work.


----------



## macca (18 July 2021)

Seems to me that a lot of folk are prepared to take the risk on Covid just to get their life back.

Looking at the OS media, lots pf protests against further restrictions and here in OZ we want to keep working no matter the cost

I agree the Vaccines seem to be limiting the spread of Covid but with the deaths still mainly in the old and frail the young say let us work but protect the elderly


----------



## Smurf1976 (18 July 2021)

What we're seeing with COVID is the effects of things which have been coming for a very long time and just needed a trigger to set them off.

Living as though nothing would ever go wrong financially and a lack of proper science education. That was always going to end badly for a lot of people, the only question is what the trigger would be.

Many of those taking to the streets are failing to grasp the real enemy here.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 July 2021)

Smurf1976 said:


> What we're seeing with COVID is the effects of things which have been coming for a very long time and just needed a trigger to set them off.
> 
> Living as though nothing would ever go wrong financially and a lack of proper science education. That was always going to end badly for a lot of people, the only question is what the trigger would be.
> 
> Many of those taking to the streets are failing to grasp the real enemy here.




My fear is what will happen to the economy when the benefit payments eventually end.

We can't keep spending our way out of trouble indefinitely, sometime there has to be payback, and that will probably be in the way of increased taxes if any government has the guts to do that.


----------



## wayneL (27 July 2021)




----------



## SirRumpole (27 July 2021)

wayneL said:


>




What about the other half ?


----------



## rederob (27 July 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> What about the other half ?



Wit?


----------



## wayneL (27 July 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> What about the other half ?



Sheep


----------



## wayneL (28 July 2021)

Bang on point:









						Protests? Whatever for? | The Spectator Australia
					

Our political class cannot comprehend why people who have been locked in their homes for the better part of two years yesterday took to the streets in the middle of a pandemic. Victoria Premier Daniel…




					www.spectator.com.au
				




Protests? Whatever for?
James Macpherson

Getty Images
26 July 2021 4:00 AM
Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
Email
Our political class cannot comprehend why people who have been locked in their homes for the better part of two years yesterday took to the streets in the middle of a pandemic.

Victoria Premier Daniel Andrews said protesters “should be ashamed of themselves” and lamented that “we can’t vaccinate against selfishness”. 

He told a press conference yesterday: “I’m making a serious point. I don’t know what half of them were protesting against!”

When a reporter volunteered the answer, “You”, Andrews shot back, “Well then good on them, except it’s illegal.”

His New South Wales counterpart Gladys Berejiklian said she was “utterly disgusted” at the protests while her Deputy Police Commissioner condemned the protesters’ “filthy, risky behaviour”.

Former Labor Treasurer Wayne Swan, a great conspiracy theory fan, retweeted suggestions the protests were organised by the same “far-right forces behind the Jan 6 attack on the US Congress”.

Kevin Rudd called it “mob rule”.

ABC journalists, comfortable in their taxpayer-funded jobs, were quick to label protesters as stupid and uneducated. 

Radio host Patricia Karvelas said: “I’m genuinely shocked that there are that many people stupid enough to protest and spread a virus that might kill them. My brain hurts.”


Victoria Chief Health Officer Brett Sutton scolded the public. “Let’s not pretend that ‘marching for freedom’ will actually deliver the precious freedom that we all need and desire,” he lectured — a bit rich since he is the one responsible for delivering the precious freedom that we all need and desire but has no plan beyond a succession of never-ending lockdowns.

What astonishes me is not so much that people protested, but that our cultural betters seem genuinely clueless as to why the patience of citizens has finally run out.

Let me help …

1.You told us to stay home for two weeks to “flatten the curve”. We did as you asked. And 18 months later we are still locked in our homes.

2. You kept brothels open but closed churches because illicit sex wouldn’t spread the virus, but religious services would.

3. You tell us you are “following the science” while subjecting us to arbitrary restrictions with zero basis in science.

4. You formed a national cabinet to fight Covid, and now use the national cabinet only to fight among yourselves — with our families, jobs and businesses as collateral damage.

5. You insisted that “we are all in this together” while we lost our jobs or saw our hours slashes and you got pay rises.

6. You keep thousands of Australian citizens from returning home while allowing a figure of such inconsequence such as Caitlyn Jenner into the country to film Big Brother, along with an entire other legion of luvvies.

7. You let these types head straight to compounds on the Queensland coast or at Byron Bay to quarantine while Australian citizens served their 14 days in poky hotel rooms with minimal facilities, many of which were health hazards themselves.

8. You refuse individuals the ability to visit interstate relatives — even immediate family — but give special exemptions to entire football teams to travel around the nation.

9. You told us Astrazeneca was unsafe for people under 60. Then you told us AZ was unsafe for people under 50. Now you urge us all to take AZ, and sneer at us if we hesitate to follow your ever-changing ‘expert’ advice. You, of course, have the power to reject this advice, but presumably are so afraid of having to take responsibility you’re happy to play along, despite the damaging confusion.

10. You said we can’t go overseas, but that the Queensland Premier simply must go overseas to pitch for an Olympic Games that we had already won and that we didn’t even want.

11. You tell us it’s too dangerous even to go outside but have created a bizarre economy and labour force that allows the wealthy to sit at home in their pyjamas getting paid to conduct Zoom meetings while the poor and many of the worst equipped to follow health warnings must daily risk their lives.

12. And can we please contrast your huffing and puffing from the weekend with your complete cowardice over those Black Lives Matter marches last year?

You treat the public like mugs for the better part of two years, and then wonder why they take to the streets effectively saying, “screw you”.

Well, of course it’s a mystery.

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 July 2021)

wayneL said:


> You treat the public like mugs for the better part of two years, and then wonder why they take to the streets effectively saying, “screw you”.




A small number of people protest. 

Most are sick of lockdowns but realise that they are necessary to achieve greater freedom in the future.


----------



## wayneL (28 July 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> A small number of people protest.
> 
> Most are sick of lockdowns but realise that they are necessary to achieve greater freedom in the future.



Stockholm syndrome


----------



## IFocus (28 July 2021)

wayneL said:


> Bang on point:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Sounds leftist to me....


----------



## SirRumpole (3 August 2021)

Fraser Anning ordered to remove Muslim villification posts from social media.









						Former senator Fraser Anning ordered to remove Facebook and Twitter posts vilifying Muslims
					

A Queensland tribunal orders former senator Fraser Anning to take down 141 pieces of content from the internet, finding he breached anti-discrimination laws by vilifying Muslims.




					www.abc.net.au


----------



## moXJO (3 August 2021)

IFocus said:


> Sounds leftist to me....



I remember anti-vaxxers as being into a pretty bohemian lifestyle. I remember a lot of the blue mountains/central coast mob. When did they get relabelled right?

To me all I'm seeing is the authoritarian left and right join forces and be overbearing dicks.


----------



## wayneL (10 August 2021)

"We" have the cookie folks.


----------



## basilio (10 August 2021)

SPC refuses to back down on vaccine mandate for staff
					

The fruit and vegetable giant is accused of refusing to respond to union concerns. But one expert says vaccine availability means mandates are likely legal.




					www.afr.com
				




Far more thoughtful analysis.
And really ? All of the workers have lawyered up ? 
SPC is going out of its way to assist workers to be vaccinated as well. As they should.


----------



## wayneL (10 August 2021)

basilio said:


> SPC refuses to back down on vaccine mandate for staff
> 
> 
> The fruit and vegetable giant is accused of refusing to respond to union concerns. But one expert says vaccine availability means mandates are likely legal.
> ...



I consider myself to be very fortunate to be self employed. Almost all of my clients, apart from those who are being coerced into vaccination through threat of termination etcetera, are in the class of vax hesitant.

And that, in my opinion is the most reasonable position.

I consider myself lucky that I can retire at any point, because if my job relied on vaccination I would just quit... Immediately.

I so very fuel sorry for those who have concerns yet are forced into it... 

In other words given the choice, most people would prefer to wait to see what happens with this... In my client list anyway.


----------



## sptrawler (23 August 2021)

Sounds as though Victoria had the opportunity to test out the new crowd control gear.








						Police consider shutting down transport system for future protests
					

Police say their response was justified by violence in the crowd, but the Police Accountability Project said pepper guns could cause serious injuries.




					www.theage.com.au
				



From the article:
Anthony Kelly, trainer with Melbourne Activist Legal Support, said that while the organisation had not sent legal observers to the protests because of the threat from COVID-19 and the involvement of far-right and white nationalists in the anti-lockdown movement, it was concerned about the “high risk of injury” from the use of this kind of weaponry.

“Because of the risk of severe, permanent or life-threatening injuries their use should be limited to only the most extreme circumstances. The trouble with any of these weapons is if they are not used in a careful or proportionate way.”
In 2018, Victoria Police was granted more than $35 million from the Andrews government to underwrite a major escalation in the force’s anti-riot capabilities. Then chief commissioner Graham Ashton said the deployment of the new equipment would be “confronting”.
The Saturday protests are believed to be the first time Victoria Police has used the new weaponry against civilians. A Victoria Police spokeswoman said the force “hoped we would never have to use this equipment” but that it was important for the safety of officers to have the option if required.
“The crowd control equipment enables police to safely engage with people who choose to act in a violent manner from a greater distance without needing to engage in a hand-to-hand physical confrontation,” she said.


----------



## basilio (23 August 2021)

Could not beat this as a response to the insanity of anti lockdown protesters.

*Anti-Lockdown Protesters To Be Sent To Afghanistan To Compare ‘Dictatorships’      * 





A new reality TV show announced this week will send a group of anti-lockdown protesters to countries including Afghanistan, North Korea and Belarus so they can compare how dictatorships in Melbourne and Sydney measure up to the ones overseas.

Named ‘Dictator Exchange’ the show will kick off with a two-week stint in Kabul. “They’ll be left to their own devices to ‘do their own research’, which they’ll love,” series producer Alicia Lam said.                                                                                

“We’ll organise the flight over, drop them in central Kabul and then leave them to do … whatever they want. Total freedom!”

The Afghanistan episode will include a series of challenges, including, _‘Create a social media post about how much you hate the leader’s new rules’_, _‘Make your own anti-government sign’_ and for women, _‘How long can you go without wearing a face covering?’_

Lam said that, as with all reality shows, viewers could expect some fireworks early on. “Oh for sure, I’m expecting the contestants to get pretty antsy. It’ll make great TV. My guess? Twenty-four hours under the Taliban and they’ll be begging to come back. They won’t even complain about the 2-week quarantine they’ll have to do when they return”.









						Anti-Lockdown Protesters To Be Sent To Afghanistan To Compare ‘Dictatorships’
					

"Let's see how long they can go without a face covering"




					www.theshovel.com.au


----------



## SirRumpole (30 December 2021)

Bunch of ratbags set old Parliament House on fire.









						Old Parliament House set on fire for second time as protests continue
					

The front entrance of Old Parliament House has been set on fire for the second consecutive week as protests continue outside the building.




					www.abc.net.au


----------



## The Triangle (30 December 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Bunch of ratbags set old Parliament House on fire.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If they were anti-vax protesters it would have been called an insurrection by the media.   But it was a _peaceful _aboriginal protest... so... must be a mistake, or the white man's fault.  Surely there is video on this fire starting?  ABC called it a smoking ceremony accident.  I saw a smoking ceremony a few months back in Perth.  No way would it have been possible to set those office buildings on fire unless there was a few bottles of petrol as well.

Glad to see post burning videos of police standing around...  What are they protecting?  people from running in to a burning building?  What were they doing before the fire started?


----------



## sptrawler (30 December 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Bunch of ratbags set old Parliament House on fire.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Must be right wing radicals, they are the ones that do damage, they were probably hiding amongst the protestors. Lol


----------



## Knobby22 (30 December 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Must be right wing radicals, they are the ones that do damage, they were probably hiding amongst the protestors. Lol



Sovereign citizens. Dangerous.


----------



## wayneL (30 December 2021)

Knobby22 said:


> Sovereign citizens. Dangerous.



 What is a sovereign citizen. And what is a non-sovereign citizen?


----------



## sptrawler (30 December 2021)

Dont have to be sovereign to be dangerous, dont even have to be a citizen, just have to have a nasty streak.


----------



## Knobby22 (30 December 2021)

wayneL said:


> What is a sovereign citizen. And what is a non-sovereign citizen?



You tell me.


----------



## wayneL (30 December 2021)

Knobby22 said:


> You tell me.



Ah, passive aggressive.... Okay.

Well Google says that a sovereign citizen is someone who follows the Freeman on the land movement... I hadn't made that connection, but ok fair enough.

Google is less illuminating on what a non-sovereign citizen is. however a non-sovereign state appears to be a a state that is either not recognised, or exists only as the client of a superior state. as far as individual citizens are concerned, it seems to imply to me, that you are a subject a superior state.

I think there is actually quite a lot to think about there to be honest.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 December 2021)

wayneL said:


> What is a sovereign citizen. And what is a non-sovereign citizen?



People who don't think that the law applies to them.


----------



## wayneL (30 December 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> People who don't think that the law applies to them.



As far as I understand Horace, from a cursory perusal of their beliefs, that they do actually strongly believe in the common law. It is statutory legislation were it seems that they have their problem..


----------



## SirRumpole (30 December 2021)

wayneL said:


> As far as I understand Horace, from a cursory perusal of their beliefs, that they do actually strongly believe in the common law. It is statutory legislation were it seems that they have their problem..



There are Courts of Appeal for that sort of thing.


----------



## Knobby22 (30 December 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> People who don't think that the law applies to them.



I would go further.

Anti citizens. Working against common interests for self interest. This particular movement started as a way to intellectually justify their selfishness e.g. the right to practice tax avoidance.

Basically they are just another form of anarchist. They damage the state from within.


----------



## sptrawler (30 December 2021)

Knobby22 said:


> I would go further.
> 
> Anti citizens. Working against common interests for self interest. This particular movement started as a way to intellectually justify their selfishness e.g. the right to practice tax avoidance.
> 
> Basically they are just another form of anarchist. They damage the state from within.



To me it is just people using the name of a cause to behave badly, it is nothing but vandalism, people have still got to fork out money to repair their disgracefull behaviour.
Taxpayers go to work to pay for welfare and now they have to go to work to repair wilfull damage.
The sad part is, those who do the damage feel they have the right to inflict that burden on the worker.
They are just common criminals IMO.
The age of entitlement.


----------



## wayneL (30 December 2021)

I thought it was indigenous that caused the fire?


----------



## sptrawler (31 December 2021)

wayneL said:


> I thought it was indigenous that caused the fire?



Does it matter, disgraceful behaviour isn't race specific, it just shows a calous lack of respect. 
Funnily enough the ones who show a lack of respect, are usually the first to get indignant, if they feel they have been disrespected.
Like I said, we live in an age of entitlement, where the only ones who aren't entitled are those who go to work to pay taxes to fund the entitled.


----------



## Smurf1976 (18 March 2022)

Sums the whole situation up brilliantly in my view:


----------



## wayneL (18 March 2022)

Smurf1976 said:


> Sums the whole situation up brilliantly in my view:




Very good.

And great channel too BTW. Thanks, subscribed


----------



## SirRumpole (18 March 2022)

Rowan Atkinson nails it.


----------



## wayneL (19 March 2022)

wayneL said:


> Nineteeneightyfour... the replacement religion.
> 
> Orwell was surely a prophet, abeit politically misguided himself.



Meme of the year


----------



## wayneL (3 April 2022)

Well we know at the sugar freedom speech is under attack on the internet by the big silicon valley conglomerates (and others). So in view of his recent distancing himself from Twitter, the corporate side of things that is, hot this was a super interesting tweet and subsequent replies from Jack Dorsey.


----------



## moXJO (3 April 2022)

wayneL said:


> Well we know at the sugar freedom speech is under attack on the internet by the big silicon valley conglomerates (and others). So in view of his recent distancing himself from Twitter, the corporate side of things that is, hot this was a super interesting tweet and subsequent replies from Jack Dorsey.




This guy sums it up best:



Twitter, Facebook and Google destroyed what was a really interesting place.


----------



## wayneL (3 April 2022)

Well, he has proved himself to be a duplicitous %$#@, @moXJO. So, would go along with that for sure.


----------

