https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqY4Z1fTrMc&feature=youtu.be

This here is literally unbelievable. Lauren Southern is forced by the police to not walk and exercise her right to freedom of speech in a suburb of Sydney. She is right, much of Sydney has indeed become Muslim land where Sharia law is practised. Much of Sydney's southwest and west has become like mini Middle East, and both the Coalition and Labor are allowing it.

The Police are enforcing Islamic blasphemy laws in Lakemba.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1501274646/270#280

Setanta wrote on Jul 28^th, 2018 at 11:28pm:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1501274646/270#280

Perhaps this thread needs to be renamed to Police enforcing Islamic blasphemy laws in Australia.

This topic and the disgraceful behaviour by the police is certainly worthy of it's own thread.

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 28^th, 2018 at 11:42pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 28th, 2018 at 11:28pm: http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1501274646/270#280 Perhaps this thread needs to be renamed to Police enforcing Islamic blasphemy laws in Australia. This topic and the disgraceful behaviour by the police is certainly worthy of it's own thread.

You are free to make one as long as the police do not direct otherwise.

What a load of bollocks. This woman wants to stir up trouble and community conflict.

The police did the right thing.

Thats strange. Youve made an enormous amount of posts condemning all coppers as thugs now you are supporting their actions.

rhino wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:00am:

Thats strange. Youve made an enormous amount of posts condemning all coppers as thugs now you are supporting their actions.

No right-wing extremists were harmed because the police stopped them fomenting conflict.

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:20am:

rhino wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:00am: Thats strange. Youve made an enormous amount of posts condemning all coppers as thugs now you are supporting their actions. No right-wing extremists were harmed because the police stopped them fomenting conflict.

Pathetic Da Ba Dee. If she walked around anywhere else as she did in Melbourne, which someone posted the video of, claiming Australians could see through bullshyte and took no offence. Then we have another video with this crap, you can see the Australians the first SJW was talking about are not these Australians. Can you see the difference? Do you want to?

Setanta wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:33am:

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:20am: rhino wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:00am: Thats strange. Youve made an enormous amount of posts condemning all coppers as thugs now you are supporting their actions. No right-wing extremists were harmed because the police stopped them fomenting conflict. Pathetic Da Ba Dee. If she walked around anywhere else as she did in Melbourne, which someone posted the video of, claiming Australians could see through bullshyte and took no offence. Then we have another video with this crap, you can see the Australians the first SJW was talking about are not these Australians. Can you see the difference? Do you want to?

The same types of bigots provoked and bullied Italians, Greeks and other foreigners in the 1950s and 1960s.

The woman is a provocateur seeking to provoke conflict.

Of course, the first generation of immigrants is different to Australians.

Of course, they tend to congregate together in their own communities like poms have often done in pommie ghettos in Australia.

No first generation immigrants are ever fully integrated into society in any country.

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 28^th, 2018 at 11:28pm:

The Police are enforcing Islamic blasphemy laws in Lakemba.

Exactly. And it's not just Lakemba. There are other suburbs out there like Auburn, Lidcombe and Bankstown, among others. That is the Muslim agenda - to go to other nations and, like cancer, spread and eventually take over.

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 28^th, 2018 at 11:56pm:

What a load of bollocks. This woman wants to stir up trouble and community conflict. The police did the right thing.

Even if that were true (and I don't agree that it is), it is totally besides the point. Part of being in a liberated western democratic culture is that we have freedom of speech, which gives us the right to say whatever we want, whether that causes offence or not. Her right to freedom of speech is being repressed here.

Does free speech applies to using profanities with children?
Or saying provocative things to people with strong suicidal tendencies (like someone who is on top of the roof)?

It isn't a matter of someone saying something and we "choose" not to listen.  It still gets into our ears, same as passive smoking.  We have laws against pollution to our noses - we also should have laws against pollution to our ears.  Do it in your backyard.

matty wrote on Jul 28^th, 2018 at 11:06pm:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqY4Z1fTrMc&feature=youtu.be This here is literally unbelievable. Lauren Southern is forced by the police to not walk and exercise her right to freedom of speech in a suburb of Sydney. She is right, much of Sydney has indeed become Muslim land where Sharia law is practised. Much of Sydney's southwest and west has become like mini Middle East, and both the Coalition and Labor are allowing it.

Poke a stick at the faith and beliefs of any group and you'll get a bite.

I'ld like to see Lauren walk into a gay parade and tell them all their ways are a highway to hell.

I'm sure she would be hospitalized.

In fact poke a stick at Lauren Southern tell her she should be pregnant and bare foot in the kitchen I'm sure she would lock jaw.

She needs a lesson in respecting other people, so go back to your own country dear and stir up sh!t there, let the rest of the world get on with it.

Lauren Southern is making money by being an instigator and provocateur of bigotry.

While she rakes it in the community is paying massive costs for police presence to prevent violence.

Lauren Southern should be made to pay the police costs.

https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/lauren-southerns-provocative-personality-has-always-been-there/news-story/50f1de0841f14f6837dada0c57a66ff1


Quote:

... Activists spread the word about the protest against the alt-right YouTube star through social media, encouraging people to “go and yell” at “rodents” Southern and fellow speaker Stefan Molyneux on their “hate speech tour” of Australia. It comes after hundreds protested against Southern in Melbourne on Friday, with several protesters infiltrating the event and one rushing on stage to “attack” the speaker, screaming, “I love Muslims.” Victoria Police said they had spent $68,000 on security and were “disappointed” the provocative event was taking officers away from their usual duties. ... Participants at her shows paid between $79 and $740 to attend — the latter cost includes an “intimate dinner”.

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:20am:

rhino wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:00am: Thats strange. Youve made an enormous amount of posts condemning all coppers as thugs now you are supporting their actions. No right-wing extremists were harmed because the police stopped them fomenting conflict.

Yeah, because if a girl asks the 'vast majority peaceful Muslims' some questions who knows what violence those Muslims might feel compelled to do to her. The cops' fears are obviously based on long experience about just how little it takes for the 'vast majority etc' Muslims to go apeshite just by being spoken to by kuffar dogs.  And so SHE is cautioned not the Musjms who are liable to disturb the peace by behaving violently.

So don't  question muslims about Islam if you want peace. Shut up, keep away, accommodate. Thats how Islam is 'the religion of peace'. Its the peace of shut up or else.

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 11:14am:

Lauren Southern is making money by being an instigator and provocateur of bigotry. While she rakes it in the community is paying massive costs for police presence to prevent violence. Lauren Southern should be made to pay the police costs. https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/lauren-southerns-provocative-personality-has-always-been-there/news-story/50f1de0841f14f6837dada0c57a66ff1 Quote: ... Activists spread the word about the protest against the alt-right YouTube star through social media, encouraging people to “go and yell” at “rodents” Southern and fellow speaker Stefan Molyneux on their “hate speech tour” of Australia. It comes after hundreds protested against Southern in Melbourne on Friday, with several protesters infiltrating the event and one rushing on stage to “attack” the speaker, screaming, “I love Muslims.” Victoria Police said they had spent $68,000 on security and were “disappointed” the provocative event was taking officers away from their usual duties. ... Participants at her shows paid between $79 and $740 to attend — the latter cost includes an “intimate dinner”.

What did the police need to do?

stunspore wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 8:33am:

Does free speech applies to using profanities with children? Or saying provocative things to people with strong suicidal tendencies (like someone who is on top of the roof)? It isn't a matter of someone saying something and we "choose" not to listen.  It still gets into our ears, same as passive smoking.  We have laws against pollution to our noses - we also should have laws against pollution to our ears.  Do it in your backyard.

The right wing like to be selective with their free speech
For instance radical muslim clerics don't get the same rights

So there you have it - I didn't know that.

We have Sharia law upheld by the police in Lakemba.

Frank wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 11:27am:

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:14am: Lauren Southern is making money by being an instigator and provocateur of bigotry. While she rakes it in the community is paying massive costs for police presence to prevent violence. Lauren Southern should be made to pay the police costs. https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/lauren-southerns-provocative-personality-has-always-been-there/news-story/50f1de0841f14f6837dada0c57a66ff1 Quote: ... Activists spread the word about the protest against the alt-right YouTube star through social media, encouraging people to “go and yell” at “rodents” Southern and fellow speaker Stefan Molyneux on their “hate speech tour” of Australia. It comes after hundreds protested against Southern in Melbourne on Friday, with several protesters infiltrating the event and one rushing on stage to “attack” the speaker, screaming, “I love Muslims.” Victoria Police said they had spent $68,000 on security and were “disappointed” the provocative event was taking officers away from their usual duties. ... Participants at her shows paid between $79 and $740 to attend — the latter cost includes an “intimate dinner”. What did the police need to do?

Prevent right wing cretins and knuckle draggers from fomenting violence.

stunspore wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 8:33am:

Does free speech applies to using profanities with children? Or saying provocative things to people with strong suicidal tendencies (like someone who is on top of the roof)? It isn't a matter of someone saying something and we "choose" not to listen.  It still gets into our ears, same as passive smoking.  We have laws against pollution to our noses - we also should have laws against pollution to our ears.  Do it in your backyard.

Well then you don't support freedom of speech, it is as clear as that. All those things are (perhaps unfortunate) by-products of freedom of speech.

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:40pm:

Frank wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:27am: Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:14am: Lauren Southern is making money by being an instigator and provocateur of bigotry. While she rakes it in the community is paying massive costs for police presence to prevent violence. Lauren Southern should be made to pay the police costs. https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/lauren-southerns-provocative-personality-has-always-been-there/news-story/50f1de0841f14f6837dada0c57a66ff1 Quote: ... Activists spread the word about the protest against the alt-right YouTube star through social media, encouraging people to “go and yell” at “rodents” Southern and fellow speaker Stefan Molyneux on their “hate speech tour” of Australia. It comes after hundreds protested against Southern in Melbourne on Friday, with several protesters infiltrating the event and one rushing on stage to “attack” the speaker, screaming, “I love Muslims.” Victoria Police said they had spent $68,000 on security and were “disappointed” the provocative event was taking officers away from their usual duties. ... Participants at her shows paid between $79 and $740 to attend — the latter cost includes an “intimate dinner”. What did the police need to do? Prevent right wing cretins and knuckle draggers from fomenting violence.

Rubbish - you're not even allowed to walk down the street in Lakemba unless you're a Muslim.

Ajax wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 10:56am:

matty wrote on Jul 28th, 2018 at 11:06pm: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqY4Z1fTrMc&feature=youtu.be This here is literally unbelievable. Lauren Southern is forced by the police to not walk and exercise her right to freedom of speech in a suburb of Sydney. She is right, much of Sydney has indeed become Muslim land where Sharia law is practised. Much of Sydney's southwest and west has become like mini Middle East, and both the Coalition and Labor are allowing it. Poke a stick at the faith and beliefs of any group and you'll get a bite. I'ld like to see Lauren walk into a gay parade and tell them all their ways are a highway to hell. I'm sure she would be hospitalized. In fact poke a stick at Lauren Southern tell her she should be pregnant and bare foot in the kitchen I'm sure she would lock jaw. She needs a lesson in respecting other people, so go back to your own country dear and stir up sh!t there, let the rest of the world get on with it.

Ditto what I said to stunspore.

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 11:14am:

Lauren Southern is making money by being an instigator and provocateur of bigotry. While she rakes it in the community is paying massive costs for police presence to prevent violence. Lauren Southern should be made to pay the police costs. https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/lauren-southerns-provocative-personality-has-always-been-there/news-story/50f1de0841f14f6837dada0c57a66ff1 Quote: ... Activists spread the word about the protest against the alt-right YouTube star through social media, encouraging people to “go and yell” at “rodents” Southern and fellow speaker Stefan Molyneux on their “hate speech tour” of Australia. It comes after hundreds protested against Southern in Melbourne on Friday, with several protesters infiltrating the event and one rushing on stage to “attack” the speaker, screaming, “I love Muslims.” Victoria Police said they had spent $68,000 on security and were “disappointed” the provocative event was taking officers away from their usual duties. ... Participants at her shows paid between $79 and $740 to attend — the latter cost includes an “intimate dinner”.

Wait, so those people who are causing the violence shouldn't pay the cost for their own violence?  :-?

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:26pm:

stunspore wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 8:33am: Does free speech applies to using profanities with children? Or saying provocative things to people with strong suicidal tendencies (like someone who is on top of the roof)? It isn't a matter of someone saying something and we "choose" not to listen.  It still gets into our ears, same as passive smoking.  We have laws against pollution to our noses - we also should have laws against pollution to our ears.  Do it in your backyard. The right wing like to be selective with their free speech For instance radical muslim clerics don't get the same rights

Who said that?

matty wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:44pm:

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:14am: Lauren Southern is making money by being an instigator and provocateur of bigotry. While she rakes it in the community is paying massive costs for police presence to prevent violence. Lauren Southern should be made to pay the police costs. https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/lauren-southerns-provocative-personality-has-always-been-there/news-story/50f1de0841f14f6837dada0c57a66ff1 Quote: ... Activists spread the word about the protest against the alt-right YouTube star through social media, encouraging people to “go and yell” at “rodents” Southern and fellow speaker Stefan Molyneux on their “hate speech tour” of Australia. It comes after hundreds protested against Southern in Melbourne on Friday, with several protesters infiltrating the event and one rushing on stage to “attack” the speaker, screaming, “I love Muslims.” Victoria Police said they had spent $68,000 on security and were “disappointed” the provocative event was taking officers away from their usual duties. ... Participants at her shows paid between $79 and $740 to attend — the latter cost includes an “intimate dinner”. Wait, so those people who are causing the violence shouldn't pay the cost for their own violence?  :-?

Nazis and right-wing terrorists?

Bobby. wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:34pm:

So there you have it - I didn't know that. We have Sharia law upheld by the police in Lakemba.

And that is why we need to vote against Labor, the Coalition and the Greens, as all three are supporting or at least condoning it.

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:40pm:

Frank wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:27am: Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:14am: Lauren Southern is making money by being an instigator and provocateur of bigotry. While she rakes it in the community is paying massive costs for police presence to prevent violence. Lauren Southern should be made to pay the police costs. https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/lauren-southerns-provocative-personality-has-always-been-there/news-story/50f1de0841f14f6837dada0c57a66ff1 Quote: ... Activists spread the word about the protest against the alt-right YouTube star through social media, encouraging people to “go and yell” at “rodents” Southern and fellow speaker Stefan Molyneux on their “hate speech tour” of Australia. It comes after hundreds protested against Southern in Melbourne on Friday, with several protesters infiltrating the event and one rushing on stage to “attack” the speaker, screaming, “I love Muslims.” Victoria Police said they had spent $68,000 on security and were “disappointed” the provocative event was taking officers away from their usual duties. ... Participants at her shows paid between $79 and $740 to attend — the latter cost includes an “intimate dinner”. What did the police need to do? Prevent right wing cretins and knuckle draggers from fomenting violence.

Or stop left-wing bigots from actually causing violence.

matty wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:47pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:34pm: So there you have it - I didn't know that. We have Sharia law upheld by the police in Lakemba. And that is why we need to vote against Labor, the Coalition and the Greens, as all three are supporting or at least condoning it.

Perhaps Hitler could be resurrected or cloned to fill your needs.

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:46pm:

matty wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:44pm: Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:14am: Lauren Southern is making money by being an instigator and provocateur of bigotry. While she rakes it in the community is paying massive costs for police presence to prevent violence. Lauren Southern should be made to pay the police costs. https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/lauren-southerns-provocative-personality-has-always-been-there/news-story/50f1de0841f14f6837dada0c57a66ff1 Quote: ... Activists spread the word about the protest against the alt-right YouTube star through social media, encouraging people to “go and yell” at “rodents” Southern and fellow speaker Stefan Molyneux on their “hate speech tour” of Australia. It comes after hundreds protested against Southern in Melbourne on Friday, with several protesters infiltrating the event and one rushing on stage to “attack” the speaker, screaming, “I love Muslims.” Victoria Police said they had spent $68,000 on security and were “disappointed” the provocative event was taking officers away from their usual duties. ... Participants at her shows paid between $79 and $740 to attend — the latter cost includes an “intimate dinner”. Wait, so those people who are causing the violence shouldn't pay the cost for their own violence?  :-? Nazis and right-wing terrorists?

Why is it that when someone from the right has rallies and talks, there a bunch of left-wing protesters who turn up to cause mayhem? Milo and Lauren are recent examples. Show me a left-wing rally where the same happens? At the so-called women's march, and all the other allies against Trump, for example, there were no right-wing protesters trying to disturb it.

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:48pm:

matty wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:47pm: Bobby. wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:34pm: So there you have it - I didn't know that. We have Sharia law upheld by the police in Lakemba. And that is why we need to vote against Labor, the Coalition and the Greens, as all three are supporting or at least condoning it. Perhaps Hitler could be resurrected or cloned to fill your needs.

No thanks, I don't support violence, unlike you.

matty wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:47pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:34pm: So there you have it - I didn't know that. We have Sharia law upheld by the police in Lakemba. And that is why we need to vote against Labor, the Coalition and the Greens, as all three are supporting or at least condoning it.

All the major parties are kissing Muslim arses.

Labor & Liberal brought them here & are now supporting their Sharia law.

matty wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:49pm:

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:46pm: matty wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:44pm: Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:14am: Lauren Southern is making money by being an instigator and provocateur of bigotry. While she rakes it in the community is paying massive costs for police presence to prevent violence. Lauren Southern should be made to pay the police costs. https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/lauren-southerns-provocative-personality-has-always-been-there/news-story/50f1de0841f14f6837dada0c57a66ff1 Quote: ... Activists spread the word about the protest against the alt-right YouTube star through social media, encouraging people to “go and yell” at “rodents” Southern and fellow speaker Stefan Molyneux on their “hate speech tour” of Australia. It comes after hundreds protested against Southern in Melbourne on Friday, with several protesters infiltrating the event and one rushing on stage to “attack” the speaker, screaming, “I love Muslims.” Victoria Police said they had spent $68,000 on security and were “disappointed” the provocative event was taking officers away from their usual duties. ... Participants at her shows paid between $79 and $740 to attend — the latter cost includes an “intimate dinner”. Wait, so those people who are causing the violence shouldn't pay the cost for their own violence?  :-? Nazis and right-wing terrorists? Why is it that when someone from the right has rallies and talks, there a bunch of left-wing protesters who turn up to cause mayhem? Milo and Lauren are recent examples. Show me a left-wing rally where the same happens? At the so-called women's march, and all the other allies against Trump, for example, there were no right-wing protesters trying to disturb it.

It is luvvie tactics, no platforming. The left is naturally censorious.  It's going to get worse.

matty wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:49pm:

At the so-called women's march, and all the other allies against Trump, for example, there were no right-wing protesters trying to disturb it.

Nazis and right-wing terrorists fear women.

This is not my own original idea but I agree with it.

Does no-one see the irony of a Canadian coming here and complaining that there are people here who aren't integrating and are trying to impose their views on us?

After all she's a foreigner, coming here to try to impose her views on us.

Aussie wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 1:15pm:

This is not my own original idea but I agree with it. Does no-one see the irony of a Canadian coming here and complaining that there are people here who aren't integrating and are trying to impose their views on us? After all she's a foreigner, coming here to try to impose her views on us.

right on................ 8-)

Let her cause kaos in her own country and leave the rest of the world to get on with it.

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:59pm:

matty wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:49pm: At the so-called women's march, and all the other allies against Trump, for example, there were no right-wing protesters trying to disturb it. Nazis and right-wing terrorists fear women.

Because no one will be in the kitchen cooking dinner?

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:26pm:

stunspore wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 8:33am: Does free speech applies to using profanities with children? Or saying provocative things to people with strong suicidal tendencies (like someone who is on top of the roof)? It isn't a matter of someone saying something and we "choose" not to listen.  It still gets into our ears, same as passive smoking.  We have laws against pollution to our noses - we also should have laws against pollution to our ears.  Do it in your backyard. The right wing like to be selective with their free speech For instance radical muslim clerics don't get the same rights

Neither do people who work in detention centres ?

They go to prison for revealing anything about it.

The conservatives legislate against freedom of speech.

Bobby. wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:43pm:

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:40pm: Frank wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:27am: Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:14am: Lauren Southern is making money by being an instigator and provocateur of bigotry. While she rakes it in the community is paying massive costs for police presence to prevent violence. Lauren Southern should be made to pay the police costs. https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/lauren-southerns-provocative-personality-has-always-been-there/news-story/50f1de0841f14f6837dada0c57a66ff1 Quote: ... Activists spread the word about the protest against the alt-right YouTube star through social media, encouraging people to “go and yell” at “rodents” Southern and fellow speaker Stefan Molyneux on their “hate speech tour” of Australia. It comes after hundreds protested against Southern in Melbourne on Friday, with several protesters infiltrating the event and one rushing on stage to “attack” the speaker, screaming, “I love Muslims.” Victoria Police said they had spent $68,000 on security and were “disappointed” the provocative event was taking officers away from their usual duties. ... Participants at her shows paid between $79 and $740 to attend — the latter cost includes an “intimate dinner”. What did the police need to do? Prevent right wing cretins and knuckle draggers from fomenting violence. Rubbish - you're not even allowed to walk down the street in Lakemba unless you're a Muslim.

Why make things up ?

I have walked in Lakemba with no problem

Bobby is too scared to walk out his front door let alone travel to Lakemba.

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 4:39pm:

Bobby is too scared to walk out his front door let alone travel to Lakemba.

So you admit Lakemba is scary?

Bobby. wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:52pm:

matty wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:47pm: Bobby. wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:34pm: So there you have it - I didn't know that. We have Sharia law upheld by the police in Lakemba. And that is why we need to vote against Labor, the Coalition and the Greens, as all three are supporting or at least condoning it. All the major parties are kissing Muslim arses. Labor & Liberal brought them here & are now supporting their Sharia law.

Absolutely, and the Greens are their number 1 cheer squad.

Secret Wars wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:53pm:

matty wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:49pm: Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:46pm: matty wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:44pm: Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:14am: Lauren Southern is making money by being an instigator and provocateur of bigotry. While she rakes it in the community is paying massive costs for police presence to prevent violence. Lauren Southern should be made to pay the police costs. https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/lauren-southerns-provocative-personality-has-always-been-there/news-story/50f1de0841f14f6837dada0c57a66ff1 Quote: ... Activists spread the word about the protest against the alt-right YouTube star through social media, encouraging people to “go and yell” at “rodents” Southern and fellow speaker Stefan Molyneux on their “hate speech tour” of Australia. It comes after hundreds protested against Southern in Melbourne on Friday, with several protesters infiltrating the event and one rushing on stage to “attack” the speaker, screaming, “I love Muslims.” Victoria Police said they had spent $68,000 on security and were “disappointed” the provocative event was taking officers away from their usual duties. ... Participants at her shows paid between $79 and $740 to attend — the latter cost includes an “intimate dinner”. Wait, so those people who are causing the violence shouldn't pay the cost for their own violence?  :-? Nazis and right-wing terrorists? Why is it that when someone from the right has rallies and talks, there a bunch of left-wing protesters who turn up to cause mayhem? Milo and Lauren are recent examples. Show me a left-wing rally where the same happens? At the so-called women's march, and all the other allies against Trump, for example, there were no right-wing protesters trying to disturb it. It is luvvie tactics, no platforming. The left is naturally censorious.  It's going to get worse.

Exactly, and the left sadly these days includes the Coalition.

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:59pm:

matty wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:49pm: At the so-called women's march, and all the other allies against Trump, for example, there were no right-wing protesters trying to disturb it. Nazis and right-wing terrorists fear women.

I will ask again - where are the right-wing protesters at left-wing rallies, causing violence?

Aussie wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 1:15pm:

This is not my own original idea but I agree with it. Does no-one see the irony of a Canadian coming here and complaining that there are people here who aren't integrating and are trying to impose their views on us? After all she's a foreigner, coming here to try to impose her views on us.

No, there is no irony and she wasn't imposing her views; she was wanting to walk the streets andrew ask people questions.

Dnarever wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 4:30pm:

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:26pm: stunspore wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 8:33am: Does free speech applies to using profanities with children? Or saying provocative things to people with strong suicidal tendencies (like someone who is on top of the roof)? It isn't a matter of someone saying something and we "choose" not to listen.  It still gets into our ears, same as passive smoking.  We have laws against pollution to our noses - we also should have laws against pollution to our ears.  Do it in your backyard. The right wing like to be selective with their free speech For instance radical muslim clerics don't get the same rights Neither do people who work in detention centres ? They go to prison for revealing anything about it. The conservatives legislate against freedom of speech.

I will ask again - where have conservatives been against freedom of speech from Muslims and others?

The Australian Constitution does not protect Freedom of Speech.

The High Court has held that an implied freedom of political communication exists as an indispensable part of the system of representative and responsible government created by the Constitution. It operates as a freedom from government restraint, rather than a right conferred directly on individuals.

Mr Hammer wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 4:52pm:

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 4:39pm: Bobby is too scared to walk out his front door let alone travel to Lakemba. So you admit Lakemba is scary?

It is really bad. I live in NSW 9 months a year and NT the other 3. I live about 45 minutes from Lakemba and the last time I drove through there (probably about a little over a month ago) literally every single woman except one I saw on the streets was wearing some kind of cloth; some the hijab and some the burqa, others in the middle. Literally just one little old Asian lady was the only woman not wearing a cloth. All the signs were in Arabic or English and Arabic; none just in English. I saw plenty of Mosques and I think just one church. Don't anyone dare tell me that that part of Sydney is not like mini Middle East.

Raven wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 5:18pm:

The Australian Constitution does not protect Freedom of Speech. The High Court has held that an implied freedom of political communication exists as an indispensable part of the system of representative and responsible government created by the Constitution. It operates as a freedom from government restraint, rather than a right conferred directly on individuals.

And we have 18C. Australia simply does not have freedom of speech. It is as simple as that.

matty wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 5:23pm:

Raven wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 5:18pm: The Australian Constitution does not protect Freedom of Speech. The High Court has held that an implied freedom of political communication exists as an indispensable part of the system of representative and responsible government created by the Constitution. It operates as a freedom from government restraint, rather than a right conferred directly on individuals. And we have 18C. Australia simply does not have freedom of speech. It is as simple as that.

Yes - we have 18c :

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-01/what-is-section-18c-and-why-do-some-politicians-want-it-changed/7806240


You're not really allowed to discuss the topic on this thread.

How long will Ozpolitic last till the mussies shut it down?

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 12:40pm:

Frank wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:27am: Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:14am: Lauren Southern is making money by being an instigator and provocateur of bigotry. While she rakes it in the community is paying massive costs for police presence to prevent violence. Lauren Southern should be made to pay the police costs. https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/lauren-southerns-provocative-personality-has-always-been-there/news-story/50f1de0841f14f6837dada0c57a66ff1 Quote: ... Activists spread the word about the protest against the alt-right YouTube star through social media, encouraging people to “go and yell” at “rodents” Southern and fellow speaker Stefan Molyneux on their “hate speech tour” of Australia. It comes after hundreds protested against Southern in Melbourne on Friday, with several protesters infiltrating the event and one rushing on stage to “attack” the speaker, screaming, “I love Muslims.” Victoria Police said they had spent $68,000 on security and were “disappointed” the provocative event was taking officers away from their usual duties. ... Participants at her shows paid between $79 and $740 to attend — the latter cost includes an “intimate dinner”. What did the police need to do? Prevent right wing cretins and knuckle draggers from fomenting violence.

Muslims are violent if they are asked  questions about Islam. So the police is stopping the questioning.

And you, negro mr bean, are all for it because of the massive chip on your shoulder about not being white.

matty wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 5:04pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 4:30pm: The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:26pm: stunspore wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 8:33am: Does free speech applies to using profanities with children? Or saying provocative things to people with strong suicidal tendencies (like someone who is on top of the roof)? It isn't a matter of someone saying something and we "choose" not to listen.  It still gets into our ears, same as passive smoking.  We have laws against pollution to our noses - we also should have laws against pollution to our ears.  Do it in your backyard. The right wing like to be selective with their free speech For instance radical muslim clerics don't get the same rights Neither do people who work in detention centres ? They go to prison for revealing anything about it. The conservatives legislate against freedom of speech. I will ask again - where have conservatives been against freedom of speech from Muslims and others?

OH so being against freedom of speech is ok in general as long as you can still abuse Muslims ?

Dnarever wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 9:59pm:

matty wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 5:04pm: Dnarever wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 4:30pm: The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:26pm: stunspore wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 8:33am: Does free speech applies to using profanities with children? Or saying provocative things to people with strong suicidal tendencies (like someone who is on top of the roof)? It isn't a matter of someone saying something and we "choose" not to listen.  It still gets into our ears, same as passive smoking.  We have laws against pollution to our noses - we also should have laws against pollution to our ears.  Do it in your backyard. The right wing like to be selective with their free speech For instance radical muslim clerics don't get the same rights Neither do people who work in detention centres ? They go to prison for revealing anything about it. The conservatives legislate against freedom of speech. I will ask again - where have conservatives been against freedom of speech from Muslims and others? OH so being against freedom of speech is ok in general as long as you can still abuse Muslims ?

You aren’t making any sense. Where did I say that I am against Muslims having freedom of speech?

Dnarever wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 4:30pm:

Neither do people who work in detention centres ? They go to prison for revealing anything about it. The conservatives legislate against freedom of speech.

Do they? Can you name one person who has been jailed for revealing information about detention centres? Just one will do. Take your time, you will need it.

Frank wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 9:48pm:

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 12:40pm: Frank wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:27am: Unforgiven wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:14am: Lauren Southern is making money by being an instigator and provocateur of bigotry. While she rakes it in the community is paying massive costs for police presence to prevent violence. Lauren Southern should be made to pay the police costs. https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/lauren-southerns-provocative-personality-has-always-been-there/news-story/50f1de0841f14f6837dada0c57a66ff1 Quote: ... Activists spread the word about the protest against the alt-right YouTube star through social media, encouraging people to “go and yell” at “rodents” Southern and fellow speaker Stefan Molyneux on their “hate speech tour” of Australia. It comes after hundreds protested against Southern in Melbourne on Friday, with several protesters infiltrating the event and one rushing on stage to “attack” the speaker, screaming, “I love Muslims.” Victoria Police said they had spent $68,000 on security and were “disappointed” the provocative event was taking officers away from their usual duties. ... Participants at her shows paid between $79 and $740 to attend — the latter cost includes an “intimate dinner”. What did the police need to do? Prevent right wing cretins and knuckle draggers from fomenting violence. Muslims are violent if they are asked  questions about Islam. So the police is stopping the questioning. And you, negro mr bean, are all for it because of the massive chip on your shoulder about not being white.

Raven has yet to see a Muslim be violent against him when he questions Islam.

And it's standard practice for the police to charge the organisers for the costs of providing security at events.

I tried to read this entire thread but it was the same stuff again. One lot saying "you cant yell fire in a theater" and the other side saying "i want to do hate speech". the point is that this govt, like howards govt, wants to make it illegal to criticize the govt.

Spot

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 30^th, 2018 at 6:03am:

I tried to read this entire thread but it was the same stuff again. One lot saying "you cant yell fire in a theater" and the other side saying "i want to do hate speech". the point is that this govt, like howards govt, wants to make it illegal to criticize the govt. Spot

Well, you are missing half your head, don't  you.

Frank wrote on Jul 30^th, 2018 at 9:26pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 30th, 2018 at 6:03am: I tried to read this entire thread but it was the same stuff again. One lot saying "you cant yell fire in a theater" and the other side saying "i want to do hate speech". the point is that this govt, like howards govt, wants to make it illegal to criticize the govt. Spot Well, you are missing half your head, don't  you.

Huh  :-/

If you don't allow people to speak their mind you have no way of challenging their argument and risk driving them underground were they will preach to the converted....Freedom of speech is what preserves our democracy???

:-? :-? :-?

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 30^th, 2018 at 9:52pm:

If you don't allow people to speak their mind you have no way of challenging their argument and risk driving them underground were they will preach to the converted....Freedom of speech is what preserves our democracy??? :-? :-? :-?

Freedom of speech does not entail confronting people and getting in their face.

People should not be confronted in their own neighborhood by a foreign instigator and provocateur of violence.

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 30^th, 2018 at 10:21pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 30th, 2018 at 9:52pm: If you don't allow people to speak their mind you have no way of challenging their argument and risk driving them underground were they will preach to the converted....Freedom of speech is what preserves our democracy??? :-? :-? :-? Freedom of speech does not entail confronting people and getting in their face. People should not be confronted in their own neighborhood by a foreign instigator and provocateur of violence.

Closet poms are always looking for trouble

Its time wrote on Jul 30^th, 2018 at 10:22pm:

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 30th, 2018 at 10:21pm: philperth2010 wrote on Jul 30th, 2018 at 9:52pm: If you don't allow people to speak their mind you have no way of challenging their argument and risk driving them underground were they will preach to the converted....Freedom of speech is what preserves our democracy??? :-? :-? :-? Freedom of speech does not entail confronting people and getting in their face. People should not be confronted in their own neighborhood by a foreign instigator and provocateur of violence. Closet poms are always looking for trouble

That's why its best they stay in their closets.

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 30^th, 2018 at 10:21pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 30th, 2018 at 9:52pm: If you don't allow people to speak their mind you have no way of challenging their argument and risk driving them underground were they will preach to the converted....Freedom of speech is what preserves our democracy??? :-? :-? :-? Freedom of speech does not entail confronting people and getting in their face. People should not be confronted in their own neighborhood by a foreign instigator and provocateur of violence.

They should be confronted with their brain damaged religious nonsense.

The same nonsense that flew aeroplanes into buildings on 911.

Bobby. wrote on Jul 30^th, 2018 at 10:30pm:

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 30th, 2018 at 10:21pm: philperth2010 wrote on Jul 30th, 2018 at 9:52pm: If you don't allow people to speak their mind you have no way of challenging their argument and risk driving them underground were they will preach to the converted....Freedom of speech is what preserves our democracy??? :-? :-? :-? Freedom of speech does not entail confronting people and getting in their face. People should not be confronted in their own neighborhood by a foreign instigator and provocateur of violence. They should be confronted with their brain damaged religious nonsense. The same nonsense that flew aeroplanes into buildings on 911.

If you want to get historical why shouldn't Muslims confront Christians and their fellow travellers about the Crusades.

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 but it got bombed to pieces anyway.

Afghanistan had nothing to do with 9/11 but it got bombed to pieces anyway.

There is no evidence that Osama Bin Laden was involved with 9/11.

The perpetrators were reputedly Egyptians, Saudis and other miscellaneous Gulf State citizens.

Lauren Southern should go to Saudi Arabia and demand answers. She should take Bobby and the Mechanic with her.

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 30^th, 2018 at 10:21pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 30th, 2018 at 9:52pm: If you don't allow people to speak their mind you have no way of challenging their argument and risk driving them underground were they will preach to the converted....Freedom of speech is what preserves our democracy??? :-? :-? :-? Freedom of speech does not entail confronting people and getting in their face. People should not be confronted in their own neighbourhood by a foreign instigator and provocateur of violence.

Any protest could provoke violence....Do you suggest we do not allow protests....Minorities have been challenging accepted norms for centuries, do you propose we outlaw their right to challenge the majority....You do not change society by remaining silent!!!

::) ::) ::)

Foreign instigator and provocateur of violence doesn't have the right to confront anybody in Australia.

This woman is doing fomenting confrontations for money, not for any altruistic purpose.

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 30^th, 2018 at 10:53pm:

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 30th, 2018 at 10:21pm: philperth2010 wrote on Jul 30th, 2018 at 9:52pm: If you don't allow people to speak their mind you have no way of challenging their argument and risk driving them underground were they will preach to the converted....Freedom of speech is what preserves our democracy??? :-? :-? :-? Freedom of speech does not entail confronting people and getting in their face. People should not be confronted in their own neighbourhood by a foreign instigator and provocateur of violence. Any protest could provoke violence....Do you suggest we do not allow protests....Minorities have been challenging accepted norms for centuries, do you propose we outlaw their right to challenge the majority....You do not change society by remaining silent!!! ::) ::) ::)

That is exactly what the govts want to do

Spot

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 30^th, 2018 at 10:36pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jul 30th, 2018 at 10:30pm: Unforgiven wrote on Jul 30th, 2018 at 10:21pm: philperth2010 wrote on Jul 30th, 2018 at 9:52pm: If you don't allow people to speak their mind you have no way of challenging their argument and risk driving them underground were they will preach to the converted....Freedom of speech is what preserves our democracy??? :-? :-? :-? Freedom of speech does not entail confronting people and getting in their face. People should not be confronted in their own neighborhood by a foreign instigator and provocateur of violence. They should be confronted with their brain damaged religious nonsense. The same nonsense that flew aeroplanes into buildings on 911. If you want to get historical why shouldn't Muslims confront Christians and their fellow travelers about the Crusades. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 but it got bombed to pieces anyway. Afghanistan had nothing to do with 9/11 but it got bombed to pieces anyway. There is no evidence that Osama Bin Laden was involved with 9/11. The perpetrators were reputedly Egyptians, Saudis and other miscellaneous Gulf State citizens. Lauren Southern should go to Saudi Arabia and demand answers. She should take Bobby and the Mechanic with her.

Islam did 911.

She couldn't go to Saudi Arabia - they would behead her.

Ahhh, the crusades.

Muzzos one and only comeback to being persicuted.

What was that, how many years ago was that again?

How about how Christians are murdered, discriminated against and generally hounded into Oblivion in muzzo countries?
Now that's persicution.
Or how Christian's are not allowed to even mention Christianity in muzzo hell holes?

And yet in Australia they get all upity when a single woman wishes to ask a simple question or two.

Not exactly a level playing field eh?

Muzzos go off at and for anything.
Their first response is violent, loud and intolerant protest.

And yet, a yone else has to pay for these retards to be held at Bay while they have a quiet, honest and open meeting.

How many of these so called  "hate speach" meetings have resulted in the people running into the streets demanding murder, beheadings and other forms of violence?

Anyone?

Ever?

Now, compare that to every single solitary muzzo protest.
They call for murder, mayhem, destruction and destruction of governments and anyone who does not follow their sick, twisted, self confessed peodophile prophet.

Can anyone else see the problem here?

There is only one problem

And it's name is Islam.

thats a really bad look for the NSW police force .
to be getting involved in politics.


if she says something and then activity occurs, then the police are free to act according to whatever laws are being broken.

but she is breaking no laws by wanting to "walk to a certain location".

the civil libertarians should be calling for heads

aquascoot wrote on Jul 31^st, 2018 at 6:44am:

thats a really bad look for the NSW police force . to be getting involved in politics. if she says something and then activity occurs, then the police are free to act according to whatever laws are being broken. but she is breaking no laws by wanting to "walk to a certain location". the civil libertarians should be calling for heads

The NSW police are defending Sharia law.

The Muslims can have streets closed off to Christians
or anyone else they don't like.

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 30^th, 2018 at 10:21pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 30th, 2018 at 9:52pm: If you don't allow people to speak their mind you have no way of challenging their argument and risk driving them underground were they will preach to the converted....Freedom of speech is what preserves our democracy??? :-? :-? :-? Freedom of speech does not entail confronting people and getting in their face. People should not be confronted in their own neighborhood by a foreign instigator and provocateur of violence.

You fuggn tinted/blue looney!!!! Since when is a Sydney suburb the Mohammedans' 'own neighbourhood'? When was Lakemba declared a Mohammedan-only jurisdiction, dickheaddle??

The chip on the tinted races' shoulder is such that they would rather have oppressive Mohammedans than be thankful to he white man who dragged them, kicking and screaming, out of primitive barbarism. The tinted people, like unforgiven, would rather submit to some other tinted hegeamon than be free and independent and self-reliant, as proposed by whitey.

You tinted guys want an overlord but you just want an overlord you do not have to look up to, like you have to look up to whitey. You rather have a tinted, barbaric overlord like a Muslim because that way your inferiority is not clear cut but is due to brute force. You hate the white people because there is no contest between your own primitive and backward customs and the white man's.

It's all psychological. Your inferiority complex is all that rules your thinking.

You have the opportunity to/ for free speech,  roast me with whatever you like, let's see if you can back up the rhetoric , you want it so bad,  preach your free speech

PS I've asked FD and he said go for your life, 

Frank wrote on Jul 31^st, 2018 at 9:41pm:

You fuggn tinted/blue looney!!!! Since when is a Sydney suburb the Mohammedans' 'own neighbourhood'? When was Lakemba declared a Mohammedan-only jurisdiction, dickheaddle?? The chip on the tinted races' shoulder is such that they would rather have oppressive Mohammedans than be thankful to he white man who dragged them, kicking and screaming, out of primitive barbarism. The tinted people, like unforgiven, would rather submit to some other tinted hegeamon than be free and independent and self-reliant, as proposed by whitey. You tinted guys want an overlord but you just want an overlord you do not have to look up to, like you have to look up to whitey. You rather have a tinted, barbaric overlord like a Muslim because that way your inferiority is not clear cut but is due to brute force. You hate the white people because there is no contest between your own primitive and backward customs and the white man's. It's all psychological. Your inferiority complex is all that rules your thinking.

Frank the bigot has come out to play.

The same Frank would become apoplectic if "tinted guys" came to Frank's neighborhood and got in his face.

Would Frank invite them in for a beer and a 'nice chat'? Fat chance.

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 31^st, 2018 at 11:18pm:

Frank wrote on Jul 31st, 2018 at 9:41pm: You fuggn tinted/blue looney!!!! Since when is a Sydney suburb the Mohammedans' 'own neighbourhood'? When was Lakemba declared a Mohammedan-only jurisdiction, dickheaddle?? The chip on the tinted races' shoulder is such that they would rather have oppressive Mohammedans than be thankful to he white man who dragged them, kicking and screaming, out of primitive barbarism. The tinted people, like unforgiven, would rather submit to some other tinted hegeamon than be free and independent and self-reliant, as proposed by whitey. You tinted guys want an overlord but you just want an overlord you do not have to look up to, like you have to look up to whitey. You rather have a tinted, barbaric overlord like a Muslim because that way your inferiority is not clear cut but is due to brute force. You hate the white people because there is no contest between your own primitive and backward customs and the white man's. It's all psychological. Your inferiority complex is all that rules your thinking. Frank the bigot has come out to play. The same Frank would become apoplectic if "tinted guys" came to Frank's neighborhood and got in his face. Would Frank invite them in for a beer and a 'nice chat'? Fat chance.

The hierarchy of civilisation and cultures is clear to everyone. That cultures and races overlap is also clear to everyone.

Flapping your silly arms around doesn't alter any of that.


It would benefit you greatly if you accepted wwhat is before your very eyes and worked on the betterment of your own people, whatever their hue.  Spending all your energy on parrotting the isdiotic lie of no cultural and corresponding racial differences between people is stupid.

Cultural differences are malleable. You can be a member of the House of Lords of the Australian Parliament, regardless of race. I doubt you can be an African chief if you are racially Chinese or European or Aborigines. They would see it as absurd.
But not so absurd to be in the House of Lords because that is about CIVILISATION that you can and invited to, enter and assimilate to.

Frank wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2018 at 7:33pm:

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 31st, 2018 at 11:18pm: Frank wrote on Jul 31st, 2018 at 9:41pm: You fuggn tinted/blue looney!!!! Since when is a Sydney suburb the Mohammedans' 'own neighbourhood'? When was Lakemba declared a Mohammedan-only jurisdiction, dickheaddle?? The chip on the tinted races' shoulder is such that they would rather have oppressive Mohammedans than be thankful to he white man who dragged them, kicking and screaming, out of primitive barbarism. The tinted people, like unforgiven, would rather submit to some other tinted hegeamon than be free and independent and self-reliant, as proposed by whitey. You tinted guys want an overlord but you just want an overlord you do not have to look up to, like you have to look up to whitey. You rather have a tinted, barbaric overlord like a Muslim because that way your inferiority is not clear cut but is due to brute force. You hate the white people because there is no contest between your own primitive and backward customs and the white man's. It's all psychological. Your inferiority complex is all that rules your thinking. Frank the bigot has come out to play. The same Frank would become apoplectic if "tinted guys" came to Frank's neighborhood and got in his face. Would Frank invite them in for a beer and a 'nice chat'? Fat chance. The hierarchy of civilisation and cultures is clear to everyone. That cultures and races overlap is also clear to everyone. Flapping your silly arms around doesn't alter any of that. It would benefit you greatly if you accepted wwhat is before your very eyes and worked on the betterment of your own people, whatever their hue.  Spending all your energy on parrotting the isdiotic lie of no cultural and corresponding racial differences between people is stupid. Cultural differences are malleable. You can be a member of the House of Lords of the Australian Parliament, regardless of race. I doubt you can be an African chief if you are racially Chinese or European or Aborigines. They would see it as absurd. But not so absurd to be in the House of Lords because that is about CIVILISATION that you can and invited to, enter and assimilate to.

I should not have asked "may I be frank".

Frank has evidently confused the silly arm flapping image in his mirror with denizen unforgiven.

There is no such thing as "House of Lords of the Australian Parliament".

matty wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 5:23pm:

Raven wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 5:18pm: The Australian Constitution does not protect Freedom of Speech. The High Court has held that an implied freedom of political communication exists as an indispensable part of the system of representative and responsible government created by the Constitution. It operates as a freedom from government restraint, rather than a right conferred directly on individuals. And we have 18C. Australia simply does not have freedom of speech. It is as simple as that.

We also have defamation laws.

Don't see how it relates to freedom of speech. She said what she wanted to say.

She seemed to be geographically limited.

She was asked to not go to the Mosque as her intention was to deliberately cause a disturbance of the peace.

It is questionable if she should have been allowed in the country, she has wasted way too much of our oxygen.

18C as far as I'm concerned doesn't inhibit free speech, it just attaches consequence to free speech before thinking. Which is fair and proper I belive.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2018 at 11:57am:

18C as far as I'm concerned doesn't inhibit free speech, it just attaches consequence to free speech before thinking. Which is fair and proper I belive.

That's true, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence.

And 18c is tempered with 18d that provides a virtually bullet proof defense.

Unforgiven wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2018 at 7:40pm:

Frank wrote on Aug 2nd, 2018 at 7:33pm: Unforgiven wrote on Jul 31st, 2018 at 11:18pm: Frank wrote on Jul 31st, 2018 at 9:41pm: You fuggn tinted/blue looney!!!! Since when is a Sydney suburb the Mohammedans' 'own neighbourhood'? When was Lakemba declared a Mohammedan-only jurisdiction, dickheaddle?? The chip on the tinted races' shoulder is such that they would rather have oppressive Mohammedans than be thankful to he white man who dragged them, kicking and screaming, out of primitive barbarism. The tinted people, like unforgiven, would rather submit to some other tinted hegeamon than be free and independent and self-reliant, as proposed by whitey. You tinted guys want an overlord but you just want an overlord you do not have to look up to, like you have to look up to whitey. You rather have a tinted, barbaric overlord like a Muslim because that way your inferiority is not clear cut but is due to brute force. You hate the white people because there is no contest between your own primitive and backward customs and the white man's. It's all psychological. Your inferiority complex is all that rules your thinking. Frank the bigot has come out to play. The same Frank would become apoplectic if "tinted guys" came to Frank's neighborhood and got in his face. Would Frank invite them in for a beer and a 'nice chat'? Fat chance. The hierarchy of civilisation and cultures is clear to everyone. That cultures and races overlap is also clear to everyone. Flapping your silly arms around doesn't alter any of that. It would benefit you greatly if you accepted wwhat is before your very eyes and worked on the betterment of your own people, whatever their hue.  Spending all your energy on parrotting the isdiotic lie of no cultural and corresponding racial differences between people is stupid. Cultural differences are malleable. You can be a member of the House or Lords of the Australian Parliament, regardless of race. I doubt you can be an African chief if you are racially Chinese or European or Aborigines. They would see it as absurd.g But not so absurd to be in the House of Lords because that is about CIVILISATION that you can and invited to, enter and assimilate to. I should not have asked "may I be frank". Frank has evidently confused the silly arm flapping image in his mirror with denizen unforgiven. There is no such thing as "House of Lords of the Australian Parliament".

OR the australian Parliament.

Attend to the point I made, mince, not to the typo/autocerrect.

Raven wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2018 at 4:11pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Aug 3rd, 2018 at 11:57am: 18C as far as I'm concerned doesn't inhibit free speech, it just attaches consequence to free speech before thinking. Which is fair and proper I belive. That's true, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence. And 18c is tempered with 18d that provides a virtually bullet proof defense.

You have both just completely contradicted yourself. Freedom of speech means that you can say whatever you want (except the fair case of defamation) without consequence. Consequences means that freedom of speech doesn't exist.

Unforgiven wrote on Jul 30^th, 2018 at 10:21pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 30th, 2018 at 9:52pm: If you don't allow people to speak their mind you have no way of challenging their argument and risk driving them underground were they will preach to the converted....Freedom of speech is what preserves our democracy??? :-? :-? :-? Freedom of speech does not entail confronting people and getting in their face. People should not be confronted in their own neighborhood by a foreign instigator and provocateur of violence.

And again we have a deflection, as usual from the left. How has Lauren in any way been violent?

Raven wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2018 at 10:27pm:

matty wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 5:23pm: Raven wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 5:18pm: The Australian Constitution does not protect Freedom of Speech. The High Court has held that an implied freedom of political communication exists as an indispensable part of the system of representative and responsible government created by the Constitution. It operates as a freedom from government restraint, rather than a right conferred directly on individuals. And we have 18C. Australia simply does not have freedom of speech. It is as simple as that. We also have defamation laws.

That's a fair exception IMO. Not fair for people to falsely slander someone else's reputation.

rhino wrote on Jul 29^th, 2018 at 11:26pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 4:30pm: Neither do people who work in detention centres ? They go to prison for revealing anything about it. The conservatives legislate against freedom of speech. Do they? Can you name one person who has been jailed for revealing information about detention centres? Just one will do. Take your time, you will need it.

One week later and he hasn't been able to refute your point or mine, and back up his claims.

matty wrote on Aug 4^th, 2018 at 11:27pm:

Raven wrote on Aug 3rd, 2018 at 4:11pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Aug 3rd, 2018 at 11:57am: 18C as far as I'm concerned doesn't inhibit free speech, it just attaches consequence to free speech before thinking. Which is fair and proper I belive. That's true, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence. And 18c is tempered with 18d that provides a virtually bullet proof defense. You have both just completely contradicted yourself. Freedom of speech means that you can say whatever you want (except the fair case of defamation) without consequence. Consequences means that freedom of speech doesn't exist.

Unfortunately you are incorrect. Freedom of speech simply means the government can not stop you from saying something. It does not mean you can not be held accountable for what you say.

A classic example is that it is illegal to yell "fire!" in a crowded place when there isn't one because someone may get hurt. You have the right to say it but be prepared to accept the consequences.

Even the Land of the Free has place limits on what constitutes free speech. It's why people can be fired from their job for what they say. Take Rosanne Barr, she exercised her right to free speech under the 1st Amendment in a tweet. And then she faced the consequences.

The 1st Amendment says: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

It doesn't shield you from criticism or consequences. So if you lose your job, or you are boycotted, banned from an internet community, your free speech rights aren't being violated. It's just that the people listening think you are an a.sshole and they are showing you door.

Frank wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2018 at 7:05pm:

Unforgiven wrote on Aug 2nd, 2018 at 7:40pm: Frank wrote on Aug 2nd, 2018 at 7:33pm: Unforgiven wrote on Jul 31st, 2018 at 11:18pm: Frank wrote on Jul 31st, 2018 at 9:41pm: You fuggn tinted/blue looney!!!! Since when is a Sydney suburb the Mohammedans' 'own neighbourhood'? When was Lakemba declared a Mohammedan-only jurisdiction, dickheaddle?? The chip on the tinted races' shoulder is such that they would rather have oppressive Mohammedans than be thankful to he white man who dragged them, kicking and screaming, out of primitive barbarism. The tinted people, like unforgiven, would rather submit to some other tinted hegeamon than be free and independent and self-reliant, as proposed by whitey. You tinted guys want an overlord but you just want an overlord you do not have to look up to, like you have to look up to whitey. You rather have a tinted, barbaric overlord like a Muslim because that way your inferiority is not clear cut but is due to brute force. You hate the white people because there is no contest between your own primitive and backward customs and the white man's. It's all psychological. Your inferiority complex is all that rules your thinking. Frank the bigot has come out to play. The same Frank would become apoplectic if "tinted guys" came to Frank's neighborhood and got in his face. Would Frank invite them in for a beer and a 'nice chat'? Fat chance. The hierarchy of civilisation and cultures is clear to everyone. That cultures and races overlap is also clear to everyone. Flapping your silly arms around doesn't alter any of that. It would benefit you greatly if you accepted wwhat is before your very eyes and worked on the betterment of your own people, whatever their hue.  Spending all your energy on parrotting the isdiotic lie of no cultural and corresponding racial differences between people is stupid. Cultural differences are malleable. You can be a member of the House or Lords of the Australian Parliament, regardless of race. I doubt you can be an African chief if you are racially Chinese or European or Aborigines. They would see it as absurd.g But not so absurd to be in the House of Lords because that is about CIVILISATION that you can and invited to, enter and assimilate to. I should not have asked "may I be frank". Frank has evidently confused the silly arm flapping image in his mirror with denizen unforgiven. There is no such thing as "House of Lords of the Australian Parliament". OR the australian Parliament. Attend to the point I made, mince, not to the typo/autocerrect.

I hate the auto correct - I often post what I didn't type when the browser turns auto correct back on.

matty wrote on Aug 4^th, 2018 at 11:27pm:

Raven wrote on Aug 3rd, 2018 at 4:11pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Aug 3rd, 2018 at 11:57am: 18C as far as I'm concerned doesn't inhibit free speech, it just attaches consequence to free speech before thinking. Which is fair and proper I belive. That's true, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence. And 18c is tempered with 18d that provides a virtually bullet proof defense. You have both just completely contradicted yourself. Freedom of speech means that you can say whatever you want (except the fair case of defamation) without consequence. Consequences means that freedom of speech doesn't exist.

That is incorrect. When it was first adopted and thus written into documents and legislation it always carried the implied notion....that it should remain within the laws of the nation. This is and always will be an underlying notion of free speech. That is fact, yours is merely opinion going against the basic origins of a privilege and right that we have.

matty wrote on Aug 4^th, 2018 at 11:33pm:

rhino wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:26pm: Dnarever wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 4:30pm: Neither do people who work in detention centres ? They go to prison for revealing anything about it. The conservatives legislate against freedom of speech. Do they? Can you name one person who has been jailed for revealing information about detention centres? Just one will do. Take your time, you will need it. One week later and he hasn't been able to refute your point or mine, and back up his claims.

What point - saying something stupid does not require a response.

The legislation preventing people involved in detention centres from revealing anything is real.


Quote:

Under the Act, it is a criminal offence, punishable by imprisonment of up to two years, for any person working directly or indirectly for the Department of Immigration and Border Protection to reveal to the media or any other person or organisation (the only exceptions being the Immigration Department and other Commonwealth agencies, police, coroners) anything that happens in detention centres like Nauru and Manus Island. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-28/barns-newhouse-detention-centre-secrecy-just-got-even-worse/6501086

Link to the act:

https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2017C00354

Amendment on protected information.

https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2017A00115


Quote:

42  Secrecy              (1)  A person commits an offence if:                      (a)  the person is, or has been, an entrusted person; and                      (b)  the person makes a record of, or discloses, information; and                      (c)  the information is Immigration and Border Protection information. Penalty:  Imprisonment for 2 years.

If you work in a detention centre the cost of free speech is 2 years, that's a fact.

matty wrote on Aug 4^th, 2018 at 11:27pm:

Raven wrote on Aug 3rd, 2018 at 4:11pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Aug 3rd, 2018 at 11:57am: 18C as far as I'm concerned doesn't inhibit free speech, it just attaches consequence to free speech before thinking. Which is fair and proper I belive. That's true, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence. And 18c is tempered with 18d that provides a virtually bullet proof defense. You have both just completely contradicted yourself. Freedom of speech means that you can say whatever you want (except the fair case of defamation) without consequence. Consequences means that freedom of speech doesn't exist.

Then to be honest, I would prefer no free speech.

Dnarever wrote on Aug 5^th, 2018 at 9:21pm:

matty wrote on Aug 4th, 2018 at 11:33pm: rhino wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:26pm: Dnarever wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 4:30pm: Neither do people who work in detention centres ? They go to prison for revealing anything about it. The conservatives legislate against freedom of speech. Do they? Can you name one person who has been jailed for revealing information about detention centres? Just one will do. Take your time, you will need it. One week later and he hasn't been able to refute your point or mine, and back up his claims. What point - saying something stupid does not require a response. The legislation preventing people involved in detention centres from revealing anything is real. Quote: Under the Act, it is a criminal offence, punishable by imprisonment of up to two years, for any person working directly or indirectly for the Department of Immigration and Border Protection to reveal to the media or any other person or organisation (the only exceptions being the Immigration Department and other Commonwealth agencies, police, coroners) anything that happens in detention centres like Nauru and Manus Island. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-28/barns-newhouse-detention-centre-secrecy-just-got-even-worse/6501086 Link to the act: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2017C00354 Amendment on protected information. https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2017A00115 [quote]42  Secrecy              (1)  A person commits an offence if:                      (a)  the person is, or has been, an entrusted person; and                      (b)  the person makes a record of, or discloses, information; and                      (c)  the information is Immigration and Border Protection information. Penalty:  Imprisonment for 2 years.

If you work in a detention centre the cost of free speech is 2 years, that's a fact.[/quote]BS, heres the actual clause. No need to lie, 

Quote:

Section 42 of the Act is disturbing in its heading alone. It is entitled "Secrecy". It provides that a person who is an "entrusted person" commits an offence if he or she makes a record of, or discloses, what is termed protected information.

Name one person who has been jailed for criticising detention centres, you cant, because no one ever has. Some states also have laws that all motor vehicles must be preceded by someone walking in front waving a red flag. No one getting jailed for that either. 

matty wrote on Aug 4^th, 2018 at 11:33pm:

rhino wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:26pm: Dnarever wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 4:30pm: Neither do people who work in detention centres ? They go to prison for revealing anything about it. The conservatives legislate against freedom of speech. Do they? Can you name one person who has been jailed for revealing information about detention centres? Just one will do. Take your time, you will need it. One week later and he hasn't been able to refute your point or mine, and back up his claims.

And now hes responded with a lie that he thought I wouldnt pick up on.

Lots of workers routinely make oaths or sign clauses that they will not reveal sensitive information, defence personnel, law enforcement officers and those who work in sensitive operational areas. Nothing to do with "free speech"

Raven wrote on Aug 5^th, 2018 at 6:47pm:

matty wrote on Aug 4th, 2018 at 11:27pm: Raven wrote on Aug 3rd, 2018 at 4:11pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Aug 3rd, 2018 at 11:57am: 18C as far as I'm concerned doesn't inhibit free speech, it just attaches consequence to free speech before thinking. Which is fair and proper I belive. That's true, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence. And 18c is tempered with 18d that provides a virtually bullet proof defense. You have both just completely contradicted yourself. Freedom of speech means that you can say whatever you want (except the fair case of defamation) without consequence. Consequences means that freedom of speech doesn't exist. Unfortunately you are incorrect. Freedom of speech simply means the government can not stop you from saying something. It does not mean you can not be held accountable for what you say. A classic example is that it is illegal to yell "fire!" in a crowded place when there isn't one because someone may get hurt. You have the right to say it but be prepared to accept the consequences. Even the Land of the Free has place limits on what constitutes free speech. It's why people can be fired from their job for what they say. Take Rosanne Barr, she exercised her right to free speech under the 1st Amendment in a tweet. And then she faced the consequences. The 1st Amendment says: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. It doesn't shield you from criticism or consequences. So if you lose your job, or you are boycotted, banned from an internet community, your free speech rights aren't being violated. It's just that the people listening think you are an a.sshole and they are showing you door.

You seem to be confusing the issue of the literal ability to talk with freedom of speech. Look up the definitions on freedom of speech and an inherent part of it is that it is free from censorhip or punishment.

Dnarever wrote on Aug 5^th, 2018 at 9:21pm:

matty wrote on Aug 4th, 2018 at 11:33pm: rhino wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:26pm: Dnarever wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 4:30pm: Neither do people who work in detention centres ? They go to prison for revealing anything about it. The conservatives legislate against freedom of speech. Do they? Can you name one person who has been jailed for revealing information about detention centres? Just one will do. Take your time, you will need it. One week later and he hasn't been able to refute your point or mine, and back up his claims. What point - saying something stupid does not require a response. The legislation preventing people involved in detention centres from revealing anything is real. Quote: Under the Act, it is a criminal offence, punishable by imprisonment of up to two years, for any person working directly or indirectly for the Department of Immigration and Border Protection to reveal to the media or any other person or organisation (the only exceptions being the Immigration Department and other Commonwealth agencies, police, coroners) anything that happens in detention centres like Nauru and Manus Island. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-28/barns-newhouse-detention-centre-secrecy-just-got-even-worse/6501086 Link to the act: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2017C00354 Amendment on protected information. https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2017A00115 [quote]42  Secrecy              (1)  A person commits an offence if:                      (a)  the person is, or has been, an entrusted person; and                      (b)  the person makes a record of, or discloses, information; and                      (c)  the information is Immigration and Border Protection information. Penalty:  Imprisonment for 2 years.

If you work in a detention centre the cost of free speech is 2 years, that's a fact.[/quote]

What Rhino said is correct, and I am asking you for a third time to give an instance where conservatives have been against Muslims having freedom of speech.

goldkam wrote on Aug 5^th, 2018 at 9:05pm:

matty wrote on Aug 4th, 2018 at 11:27pm: Raven wrote on Aug 3rd, 2018 at 4:11pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Aug 3rd, 2018 at 11:57am: 18C as far as I'm concerned doesn't inhibit free speech, it just attaches consequence to free speech before thinking. Which is fair and proper I belive. That's true, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence. And 18c is tempered with 18d that provides a virtually bullet proof defense. You have both just completely contradicted yourself. Freedom of speech means that you can say whatever you want (except the fair case of defamation) without consequence. Consequences means that freedom of speech doesn't exist. That is incorrect. When it was first adopted and thus written into documents and legislation it always carried the implied notion....that it should remain within the laws of the nation. This is and always will be an underlying notion of free speech. That is fact, yours is merely opinion going against the basic origins of a privilege and right that we have.

As I said to Raven.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Aug 5^th, 2018 at 9:22pm:

matty wrote on Aug 4th, 2018 at 11:27pm: Raven wrote on Aug 3rd, 2018 at 4:11pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Aug 3rd, 2018 at 11:57am: 18C as far as I'm concerned doesn't inhibit free speech, it just attaches consequence to free speech before thinking. Which is fair and proper I belive. That's true, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence. And 18c is tempered with 18d that provides a virtually bullet proof defense. You have both just completely contradicted yourself. Freedom of speech means that you can say whatever you want (except the fair case of defamation) without consequence. Consequences means that freedom of speech doesn't exist. Then to be honest, I would prefer no free speech.

Well then go live in the Middle East.

rhino wrote on Aug 5^th, 2018 at 9:39pm:

matty wrote on Aug 4th, 2018 at 11:33pm: rhino wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:26pm: Dnarever wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 4:30pm: Neither do people who work in detention centres ? They go to prison for revealing anything about it. The conservatives legislate against freedom of speech. Do they? Can you name one person who has been jailed for revealing information about detention centres? Just one will do. Take your time, you will need it. One week later and he hasn't been able to refute your point or mine, and back up his claims. And now hes responded with a lie that he thought I wouldnt pick up on.

He's known for just spouting rubbish that he thinks others won't realise. Back in 2011 when Gillard broke the no carbon tax promise, he kept trying to equate it with Howard's backflip on the GST, despite the fact that when Howard did backflip, he took it straight to an election.

matty wrote on Aug 7^th, 2018 at 2:06pm:

rhino wrote on Aug 5th, 2018 at 9:39pm: matty wrote on Aug 4th, 2018 at 11:33pm: rhino wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:26pm: Dnarever wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 4:30pm: Neither do people who work in detention centres ? They go to prison for revealing anything about it. The conservatives legislate against freedom of speech. Do they? Can you name one person who has been jailed for revealing information about detention centres? Just one will do. Take your time, you will need it. One week later and he hasn't been able to refute your point or mine, and back up his claims. And now hes responded with a lie that he thought I wouldnt pick up on. He's known for just spouting rubbish that he thinks others won't realise. Back in 2011 when Gillard broke the no carbon tax promise, he kept trying to equate it with Howard's backflip on the GST, despite the fact that when Howard did backflip, he took it straight to an election.

Maybe no ones revealed anything because they are too scared of going to goal.

Very effective suppression of speech.

So can you name someone who has spoken up about detention centres that actually worked there as a guard or any capacity on the Australian government payroll & has not gone to goal?

matty wrote on Aug 7^th, 2018 at 2:00pm:

Raven wrote on Aug 5th, 2018 at 6:47pm: matty wrote on Aug 4th, 2018 at 11:27pm: Raven wrote on Aug 3rd, 2018 at 4:11pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Aug 3rd, 2018 at 11:57am: 18C as far as I'm concerned doesn't inhibit free speech, it just attaches consequence to free speech before thinking. Which is fair and proper I belive. That's true, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence. And 18c is tempered with 18d that provides a virtually bullet proof defense. You have both just completely contradicted yourself. Freedom of speech means that you can say whatever you want (except the fair case of defamation) without consequence. Consequences means that freedom of speech doesn't exist. Unfortunately you are incorrect. Freedom of speech simply means the government can not stop you from saying something. It does not mean you can not be held accountable for what you say. A classic example is that it is illegal to yell "fire!" in a crowded place when there isn't one because someone may get hurt. You have the right to say it but be prepared to accept the consequences. Even the Land of the Free has place limits on what constitutes free speech. It's why people can be fired from their job for what they say. Take Rosanne Barr, she exercised her right to free speech under the 1st Amendment in a tweet. And then she faced the consequences. The 1st Amendment says: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. It doesn't shield you from criticism or consequences. So if you lose your job, or you are boycotted, banned from an internet community, your free speech rights aren't being violated. It's just that the people listening think you are an a.sshole and they are showing you door. You seem to be confusing the issue of the literal ability to talk with freedom of speech. Look up the definitions on freedom of speech and an inherent part of it is that it is free from censorhip or punishment.

According to dictionary.com freedom of speech is defined as:

noun
1. The right of people to express their opinions publicly without governmental interference, subject to the laws against libel, incitement to violence or rebellion, etc.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 19 states:

"everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference" and "everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice". The version of Article 19 in the Internationl Covenant on Civil and Political Rights later amends this by stating that the exercise of these rights carries "special duties and responsibilities" and may "therefore be subject to certain restrictions" when necessary "[f]or respect of the rights or reputation of others" or "[f]or the protection of national security or of public order (order public), or of public health or morals".

Freedom of speech and expression, therefore, may not be recognized as being absolute, and common limitations to freedom of speech relate to libel, slander, obscenity, pornography, sedition, incitement, fighting words, classified information, copyright violation, trade secrets, food labeling, non-disclosure agreements, the right to privacy, the right to be forgotten, public security, and perjury.

Even the US has placed limitations on freedom of speech.

The fighting words doctrine, in United States constitutional law, is a limitation to freedom of speech as protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Chaplin's v New Hampshire 1942

Chaplinsky, a Jehovah's Witness, had purportedly told a New Hampshire town marshal who was attempting to prevent him from preaching that he was "a damned racketeer" and "a damned fascist" and was arrested.

The US Supreme Court in a 9-0 decision upheld the arrest and found that:

"There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which have never been thought to raise any Constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or "fighting" words--those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality."

It is naive to think a society can function properly if you are not held accountable for your actions or your words.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z2uzEM0ugY

rhino wrote on Aug 5^th, 2018 at 9:35pm:

Dnarever wrote on Aug 5th, 2018 at 9:21pm: matty wrote on Aug 4th, 2018 at 11:33pm: rhino wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 11:26pm: Dnarever wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 4:30pm: Neither do people who work in detention centres ? They go to prison for revealing anything about it. The conservatives legislate against freedom of speech. Do they? Can you name one person who has been jailed for revealing information about detention centres? Just one will do. Take your time, you will need it. One week later and he hasn't been able to refute your point or mine, and back up his claims. What point - saying something stupid does not require a response. The legislation preventing people involved in detention centres from revealing anything is real. Quote: Under the Act, it is a criminal offence, punishable by imprisonment of up to two years, for any person working directly or indirectly for the Department of Immigration and Border Protection to reveal to the media or any other person or organisation (the only exceptions being the Immigration Department and other Commonwealth agencies, police, coroners) anything that happens in detention centres like Nauru and Manus Island. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-28/barns-newhouse-detention-centre-secrecy-just-got-even-worse/6501086 Link to the act: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2017C00354 Amendment on protected information. https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2017A00115 [quote]42  Secrecy              (1)  A person commits an offence if:                      (a)  the person is, or has been, an entrusted person; and                      (b)  the person makes a record of, or discloses, information; and                      (c)  the information is Immigration and Border Protection information. Penalty:  Imprisonment for 2 years. If you work in a detention centre the cost of free speech is 2 years, that's a fact.

BS, heres the actual clause. No need to lie, 

Quote:

Section 42 of the Act is disturbing in its heading alone. It is entitled "Secrecy". It provides that a person who is an "entrusted person" commits an offence if he or she makes a record of, or discloses, what is termed protected information.

Name one person who has been jailed for criticising detention centres, you cant, because no one ever has. Some states also have laws that all motor vehicles must be preceded by someone walking in front waving a red flag. No one getting jailed for that either.  [/quote]

Do you think that this previous post means anything ?

The legislation is in place - employees are being intimidated into silence and employees would go to prison if they were to speak out. Employees have been effectively muzzled by legislation meant to deprive people of the freedom of speech.

This is absolutely disgraceful and it is also a fact.

I've missed you though matty, I used to sit patiently waiting for your 41st thread on the non-important topic of SSM.

matty wrote on Aug 4^th, 2018 at 11:31pm:

Raven wrote on Aug 2nd, 2018 at 10:27pm: matty wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 5:23pm: Raven wrote on Jul 29th, 2018 at 5:18pm: The Australian Constitution does not protect Freedom of Speech. The High Court has held that an implied freedom of political communication exists as an indispensable part of the system of representative and responsible government created by the Constitution. It operates as a freedom from government restraint, rather than a right conferred directly on individuals. And we have 18C. Australia simply does not have freedom of speech. It is as simple as that. We also have defamation laws. That's a fair exception IMO. Not fair for people to falsely slander someone else's reputation.

As far as I can tell there is virtually no meaningful distinction between defamation laws and the restrictions contained in 18C - particularly when its viewed alongside 18D. Case in point - the famous Bolt case could have easily been a defamation suit instead (in which case the claimants would have received a financial payout - thus putting lie to the claim that the claimants were motivated by self interest)