Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Sarah Hanson-Young: The most honest, humane politician we have

Jump to new
TikoMike said:
You're talking about a person that thinks Sea Patrol is real life.
Click to expand...
That was a bizarre enquiry. The enquirer was lost for words throughout the whole process, drew conclusions, butted in and created imaginative analogies. All while holding an unbreakable self righteousness and determination. An actress????
 
I see Sarah is offering David an out of court settlement.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...hjelm-in-defamation-case-20180908-p502jx.html

It will be interesting to see how it goes, it might be a great outcome.

An extract from the article:
But according to Senator Leyonhjelm and his legal team, Senator Hanson-Young is misrepresenting the case.

“She also continues to tell her supporters in a crowdfunding campaign that the court proceedings relate to alleged 'slut-shaming' (her words, I have never used this phrase) and other aspects of her personal life or sexual behaviour,” Senator Leyonhjelm said.


“In fact, none of that is true. Her statement of claim relates only to claimed defamation for misandry and hypocrisy.

“If her donors were aware that their money will not be used to fight alleged sexist behaviour and bullying, but to fund a personal political vendetta based on such minor concerns, I doubt they would be impressed.”
 
One would guess, it will all be quietly shoveled under the carpet and someone got their 15 minutes of fame, probably at the tax payers expense. It really is starting to make me nauseous, the way these politicians and media behave.
They should start and realise, it is our lives and livelihoods that are dependent on their combined effort, it is about flucking time they understood that. IMO
 
Well the heading of the thread is a bit miss leading, I thought her court action was about Leyonhjelm "slut shaming her".
Apparently not:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-20/senator-leyonhjelm-to-fight-defamation-case/10285472

From the article:
Lawyers for Senator Hanson-Young allege Senator Leyonhjelm repeatedly accused her of making "the absurd claim that all men are rapists".

In documents lodged to the Federal Court, her lawyers accuse him of defaming her by suggesting she is a "misandrist" and a "hypocrite"

Wow that is a bit distant from what was reported at the time.
It is a shame the media don't see it, the same way many of the public will, but I guess it's about what is news worthy.
 
The heading of the thread is not misleading at all.

What is in the way is political and sexist bias.

The good Senator Leyonhjelm created it all with his comments (first) against Hanson-Young
 
explod said:
The heading of the thread is not misleading at all.

What is in the way is political and sexist bias.

The good Senator Leyonhjelm created it all with his comments (first) against Hanson-Young
Click to expand...
Well I'm not interested in any way, other than from feeling males are being persecuted, by the press at the moment.
From what I read my take on it was, She kept bagging men, He said well if you hate them so much stop shagging them, She said you are slut shaming me I'm going to take you to court.
Now we find the case isn't about that at all?
 
What you and many of us read in the beginning was the take of "the men" and the LNP leaning press. Here-say not facts. The court will decide on the facts
 
As I always say, time will tell, it will be an interesting case Sarah called it.
Her credibility will forever be tarnished, if she loses it, and also the cause she basis it on.
 
sptrawler said:
Well the heading of the thread is a bit miss leading, I thought her court action was about Leyonhjelm "slut shaming her".
Apparently not:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-20/senator-leyonhjelm-to-fight-defamation-case/10285472

From the article:
Lawyers for Senator Hanson-Young allege Senator Leyonhjelm repeatedly accused her of making "the absurd claim that all men are rapists".

In documents lodged to the Federal Court, her lawyers accuse him of defaming her by suggesting she is a "misandrist" and a "hypocrite"

Wow that is a bit distant from what was reported at the time.
It is a shame the media don't see it, the same way many of the public will, but I guess it's about what is news worthy.
Click to expand...

So the basis of her claim is he allegedly falsely accused her of being a misandrist and a hypocrite? What about her "I was slut shamed"? What about her doing it for every Women? What about her interview with Lisa Wilkinson? Is she now admitting she is/was a "slut", She's certainly a bully.
Can we sue her for discrimination over her "white Males" comment?
 
Darc Knight said:
So the basis of her claim is he allegedly falsely accused her of being a misandrist and a hypocrite? What about her "I was slut shamed"? What about her doing it for every Women? What about her interview with Lisa Wilkinson? Is she now admitting she is/was a "slut", She's certainly a bully.
Can we sue her for discrimination over her "white Males" comment?
Click to expand...

Slut shaming suit would require character witnesses
 
Not often Virginia doesn't rise to the occasion to embrace a fellow down trodden human being that is by her definition any female. Hoping for a tilt at the boss' job perhaps and showing her new found impartiality?

Sarah is on the publicity trail with her new book "En Garde", another sisters book that tries to explain away personal failure and place it on the broad shoulders of men. Couldn't have come at a better time for a pending case against David.
 
Tisme said:
Not often Virginia doesn't rise to the occasion to embrace a fellow down trodden human being that is by her definition any female. Hoping for a tilt at the boss' job perhaps and showing her new found impartiality?

Sarah is on the publicity trail with her new book "En Garde", another sisters book that tries to explain away personal failure and place it on the broad shoulders of men. Couldn't have come at a better time for a pending case against David.
Click to expand...

I thought the offending remarks were made in Parliament and are therefore subject to Parliamentary privilege ? Beats me how she can sue.
 
SirRumpole said:
I thought the offending remarks were made in Parliament and are therefore subject to Parliamentary privilege ? Beats me how she can sue.
Click to expand...

repeated them after. The real concern fro me is that a public servant is crowd funding a case against another public servant, using a public service court to adjudicate. If she loses who is going to pay David's costs, if he counter sues who pays that?
 
Tisme said:
repeated them after. The real concern fro me is that a public servant is crowd funding a case against another public servant, using a public service court to adjudicate. If she loses who is going to pay David's costs, if he counter sues who pays that?
Click to expand...

Yes, it's all a pretty childish spat that should be resolved out of court.
 
Garpal Gumnut said:
What I cannot understand is SHY calling herself a slut.

It would be like me calling myself a fat, past his time, opinionated bore.

gg
Click to expand...

I think she's trying to adhere the comment to David ... her disciples will eventually believe David did say it.
 

Similar threads

2020hindsight
Spare a thought for the Chinese
Replies
17
Views
6K
2020hindsight
2020hindsight
R
The Financial Endgame
Replies
18
Views
9K
qldfrog
qldfrog
Top