Australian Politics Forum | |
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl
General Discussion >> General Board >> the poster children for 18c http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1481955725 Message started by freediver on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:22pm |
Title: the poster children for 18c Post by freediver on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:22pm
Gerald Fredrick Töben was brought before the Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission for violating section 18c of the Racial Discrimination Act by denying the holocaust. The HREOC found against him, but he ignored them, so they escalated the matter to the federal court, who issued a court order enforcing the HREOC findings under section 18c. Toben ignored that also and continued denying the holocaust on his website. He was eventually jailed for his opinion.
Supporters of 18c insist it is not a threat to freedom of speech because of the exemptions under section 18d. However these exemptions did not protect Toben, and would be unlikely to protect others whose views are unpopular. Supporters of 18c try various lies to distance 18c from Toben's jailing, from the subtle to the idiotic. Even I am surprised by how many people are doing this. This is as good a reason as any to defend freedom of speech. If not, you leave yourself at the mercy of this sort of idiocy. Anyway, here they are. Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Dec 12th, 2016 at 11:24am:
longweekend58 wrote on Dec 12th, 2016 at 12:13pm:
Dnarever wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 12:50pm:
Dnarever wrote on Dec 14th, 2016 at 7:22pm:
Dnarever wrote on Dec 15th, 2016 at 8:40pm:
John Smith wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 11:03am:
Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 13th, 2016 at 3:22pm:
Raven wrote on Dec 14th, 2016 at 12:13pm:
Raven wrote on Dec 15th, 2016 at 8:26pm:
John Smith wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 10:56am:
John Smith wrote on Dec 12th, 2016 at 3:54pm:
John Smith wrote on Dec 13th, 2016 at 11:04pm:
|
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by freediver on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:22pm John Smith wrote on Dec 15th, 2016 at 9:42pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 2:26pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 9:09pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Dec 12th, 2016 at 4:10pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 9:56pm:
The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 11:26am:
Aussie wrote on Dec 12th, 2016 at 6:50pm:
Aussie wrote on Dec 6th, 2016 at 7:15pm:
|
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Aussie on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:23pm
THREAD # 5!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
;D |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by gandalf on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:24pm
FD have you come to a decision on whether or not Toben was gaoled for his opinion yet?
freediver wrote on Dec 15th, 2016 at 9:23pm:
Quote from FD's thread entitled Gerald Fredrick Töben - jailed for his opinion |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by freediver on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:33pm
What do you think I meant by that Gandalf?
Did you make a submission on 18c? |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by The_Barnacle on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:35pm
Another thread on 18c?
This just supports what I said in the opening post of my own thread. It seems people are more concerned with their right to be racists and bigots than they are about ensuring the Government is held to account. The draconian "special intelligence operation" legislation would never get 5 posts running at once |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by freediver on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:45pm Quote:
That's what freedom f speech means Barnacle. From your thread - do you agree with this? Dnarever wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 12:30pm:
Dnarever wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 1:09pm:
mothra wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 1:44pm:
mothra wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 1:55pm:
mothra wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 2:51pm:
|
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by gandalf on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:49pm freediver wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:33pm:
Are you saying you meant something different to what you said? Was Toben jailed for his opinion? |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Karnal on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:59pm Quote:
Thanks for raising my question, FD, I'd forgotten about that one. Would you like to answer it? |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Karnal on Dec 17th, 2016 at 5:01pm freediver wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:45pm:
Actually, it's the eopposite. The defence of freedom of speech is normally used when speaking out against the powerful. Racists and bigots use their speech against the powerless. Freeeeedom, innit. |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Dustwun on Dec 17th, 2016 at 5:04pm Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 5:01pm:
What about speaking out against Sunni who bugger all other religions they encounter? |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Mr Hammer on Dec 17th, 2016 at 5:05pm Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 5:01pm:
|
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Karnal on Dec 17th, 2016 at 5:11pm Dustwun wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 5:04pm:
I'd say you need to know a bit more before you express your Freeeeeedom. |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by John Smith on Dec 17th, 2016 at 8:23pm Are you hoping that if you keep starting theads on this, the facts will eventually change to suit your argument? https://youtu.be/iDNtqy0zjJA?t=4 |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Aussie on Dec 17th, 2016 at 8:51pm John Smith wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 8:23pm:
This is a typical FD quote bomb. He carefully selects posts, isolates them out of context and then posts them as a collage, purporting to be integral and in context, in one of these dumbarse 'bombs.' Really stupid and so obviously disingenuous. |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Karnal on Dec 17th, 2016 at 9:41pm Aussie wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 8:51pm:
That's true, Aussie. FD's an artist of the highest caliber. Another masterpiece. |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by freediver on Dec 17th, 2016 at 9:51pm polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:49pm:
The specific question I was asking was not about the reason for Toben's jailing. Quote:
Aussie you have repeatedly accused me of misrepresenting you by quoting you, insisting that your words meant something different in a different time and that the context was also somehow different (despite your complaints about the number of threads on the same topic). You never explained how the time and context changed the meaning of your words. Would you like to enlighten us? Or is your standard response to accuse people of lying whenever you are caught out? Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 5:01pm:
Can you give some examples of speech that is covered by freedom of speech? Do you think for example that Toben is part of the powerful majority? Gandalf seems to think it is the Jews' fault. Are we only allowed to use freedom of speech to defend Muslims, dirty hippies and people who cannot make the mental leap from being jailed to being denied freedom? |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Aussie on Dec 17th, 2016 at 10:01pm
Your words FD:
....freedom of speech..... Please define exactly what you mean. |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Karnal on Dec 17th, 2016 at 10:15pm freediver wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 9:51pm:
Can you give some examples of speech that is covered by freedom of speech? Do you think for example that Toben is part of the powerful majority? Gandalf seems to think it is the Jews' fault. Are we only allowed to use freedom of speech to defend Muslims, dirty hippies and people who cannot make the mental leap from being jailed to being denied freedom?[/quote] Now that's a question. |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Setanta on Dec 17th, 2016 at 11:54pm Aussie wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 10:01pm:
Want mine? No political speech should be encumbered by law. |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by The Grappler on Dec 18th, 2016 at 12:26am Setanta wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 11:54pm:
But always remember that the body politic is a body that makes the laws etc - and a policy of that body politic of mass extermination or persecution of a specified social group** etc is Now we all know that various policies of mass extermination of rights and livelihoods have been in place here for forty years... over to you.... **such actions are defined as Crimes Against Humanity by The Hague... yet entire demographics here can be discriminated against and not a word said..... so you need to be always wary of your 'body politic', since it has to power to prevent such things, but here, now - it chooses not to, and instead actively engages in them. Thus it is complicit and even guilty of initiating these policies..... or at the very least suffering a depraved indifference..... You know the policies I mean...... *** be wary of confusing 'unlawful' with 'illegal' - 'unlawful' simply means there is no law to cover it at this time - 'illegal' means that it does not accord with the Rule of Law.... thus clearly, many policies of recent advent are illegal but not unlawful, often for the simple reason that there is no apparatus or opportunity for them to be challenged ... affirmative action being but one among them... 8-) (aced 'em again!)..... ;) |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by freediver on Dec 18th, 2016 at 7:46am The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:35pm:
Barnacle, you claim to have started the other thread out of genuine support for freedom of speech, but have spent more time downplaying a more direct and explicit attack on freedom of speech. Doesn't that seem a bit hypocritical to you? Aussie I went in search of an explanation of how a "different time" (1 week) and "different context" (a thread you insist is on the same topic), somehow makes it misleading for me to quote you directly. I could not find any. What I did find was a rich vein of highly concentrated stupid. Aussie wrote on Nov 27th, 2016 at 9:28am:
Aussie wrote on Nov 27th, 2016 at 9:50am:
Aussie wrote on Nov 27th, 2016 at 11:17am:
Aussie wrote on Nov 27th, 2016 at 11:47am:
Aussie wrote on Nov 27th, 2016 at 12:30pm:
Aussie wrote on Nov 27th, 2016 at 12:58pm:
Indeed it is.[/quote] Aussie wrote on Nov 30th, 2016 at 5:10pm:
Aussie wrote on Dec 1st, 2016 at 1:46pm:
Aussie wrote on Dec 1st, 2016 at 1:57pm:
|
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by freediver on Dec 18th, 2016 at 9:32am Aussie wrote on Dec 2nd, 2016 at 5:12pm:
Aussie wrote on Dec 2nd, 2016 at 7:51pm:
Aussie wrote on Dec 3rd, 2016 at 8:49pm:
Aussie wrote on Dec 3rd, 2016 at 8:58pm:
Aussie wrote on Dec 4th, 2016 at 8:38am:
Aussie wrote on Dec 6th, 2016 at 6:11pm:
Aussie wrote on Dec 6th, 2016 at 7:15pm:
Mattyfisk wrote on Nov 28th, 2016 at 4:01pm:
Mattyfisk wrote on Nov 30th, 2016 at 2:13pm:
Raven wrote on Nov 30th, 2016 at 6:03pm:
Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 3:44pm:
Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:19pm:
mothra wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 3:03pm:
mothra wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 3:15pm:
|
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by freediver on Dec 18th, 2016 at 9:35am Aussie wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:00pm:
Aussie wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:43pm:
Aussie wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 9:54pm:
Dnarever wrote on Dec 18th, 2016 at 7:27am:
Dnarever wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 8:57am:
Dnarever wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 9:14am:
John Smith wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 10:42am:
John Smith wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 10:37am:
John Smith wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 7:10pm:
The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 9:34am:
The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 10:45am:
|
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Brian Ross on Dec 18th, 2016 at 5:18pm |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by freediver on Dec 22nd, 2016 at 1:41pm
Brian do you think Toben should have been jailed for his opinion?
|
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by John Smith on Dec 22nd, 2016 at 2:41pm freediver wrote on Dec 22nd, 2016 at 1:41pm:
he was jailed for contempt of court. |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Brian Ross on Dec 22nd, 2016 at 3:37pm freediver wrote on Dec 22nd, 2016 at 1:41pm:
He was gaoled for contravening a court order, FD. No matter how you attempt to dress this, that was why he was gaoled. ::) |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Raven on Dec 22nd, 2016 at 3:57pm
Freediver is unable to grasp the fact that freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence.
His inability to understand how the law works means he will continue to post inaccurate statements in threads such as this |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Karnal on Dec 22nd, 2016 at 8:03pm Brian Ross wrote on Dec 22nd, 2016 at 3:37pm:
Toben acknowledged this himself. He even apologised for it. Toben is a serial Holocaust-denial law tester. He did the same in two European countries. He acknowledged that Australia did not jail him for denying the Holocaust, as they did in Europe. FD disagrees with his very own martyr. Freeeeeedom, innit. |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Karnal on Dec 22nd, 2016 at 8:07pm Raven wrote on Dec 22nd, 2016 at 3:57pm:
FD is that rare breed of Freeeedom-fancier who upholds the right to tell you porkie pies. FD's statements are not just inaccurate. Many are out-and-out fibs. |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Frank on Dec 22nd, 2016 at 10:43pm Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 22nd, 2016 at 8:07pm:
At least he's not a vagina like you. Not everyone can be. Or has to be. You have chosen that path, that's your choice. We get it. |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Karnal on Dec 22nd, 2016 at 11:01pm Frank wrote on Dec 22nd, 2016 at 10:43pm:
Oh yes, and here we have the other one, FD's partner in porkie pies. The uncanny thing is, of all the serial liars here, FD and your good self are the only two to admit it. You're really very brave, you know, but can I ask? Have you ever thought of just going straight? |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Frank on Dec 22nd, 2016 at 11:19pm
And if only we knew what you are blabbering on about, old girl. Not even you know. It's all oblique hints and miam miams.
|
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Karnal on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 12:39am Frank wrote on Dec 22nd, 2016 at 11:19pm:
Oh, I see. Your memory was wiped when you became Frank, eh? Intelligence and integrity, innit. |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Setanta on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 1:01am Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 12:39am:
Matty? |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Karnal on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 9:06am Setanta wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 1:01am:
No, Setanta, Matty (AKA Mattywisk) has a new sock each week. The old boy (AKA Sore End) only starts them up when he gets banned. Intelligence and integrity, you see. |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by freediver on Mar 1st, 2017 at 6:31pm
18C: Racial Discrimination Act changes divides Liberal Party backbenchers
www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-01/backbenchers-battle-over-changes-to-racial-discrimination-act/8312626 The Liberal Party is split over whether restrictions on freedom of speech should be watered down, putting pressure on the Prime Minister and Cabinet over which side of the party to favour. Key points: No consensus was reached in yesterday's Parliament regarding 18C Ian Goodenough says he would support changing the wording of the Act David Coleman does not think that "changes to 18C are appropriate" Yesterday the Parliament's Joint Committee on Human Rights tabled its report into the Racial Discrimination Act, but failed to reach a consensus on whether Section 18C, which makes it illegal to offend, insult or humiliate someone because of their race, should be changed. Liberal backbencher and Committee Chair Ian Goodenough said he favoured changing the Act's wording. "I think there is a fair level of support to make freedom of speech more accessible," he told AM. While the report had bipartisan recommendations about making sure only people with a genuine claim use the Act, there was no consensus over whether to change part 18C. Instead the report had six suggestions about where to go to from there. "I would support replacing the words of offend and insult with a higher term, such as harass or vilify," Mr Goodenough said. "Section 18C was introduced during the Keating government. Words have changed in our society, what it means to offend someone in today's society is a lot different to what it was to offend back 20 years ago, so there needs to be contemporary use of the language." Mr Goodenough is one of many Liberals who want a re-write of Section 18C. His party colleagues James Paterson, Dean Smith, Eric Abetz are all supportive of changing the Act. But the debate over free speech is not one-sided. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is facing pressure from the more moderate end of the party, who are worried that watering down free speech sends a bad signal. 'You can't scrap the entire law': Coleman One of those opposed to change is David Coleman. His Sydney electorate of Banks is diverse, and around 30 per cent of constituents are from a Chinese background. "I don't think that changes to 18C are appropriate," he told AM. "I am of the view that the law has been in place for more than 20 years, I think that it has worked effectively in defending against racial discrimination." He says his electorate does not want to see a change to the Act. "There is certainly a substantial number of people in my community who are supportive of the existing laws, who have found the existing laws helpful in protecting them against racial discrimination," he said. Mr Coleman supported the report's recommendations to speed up the legal process, but he strongly opposed moves to broaden free speech under the law. "It's not the case that simply because you have vexatious claims under a law that you get rid of the entire law," he said. "There are obviously many aspects of law where vexatious claims are made, and the appropriate way of dealing with that is to address those process issues. But it's a very different matter to say that the law itself should be repealed, and that's not something I support." He said he would be talking with his Liberal colleagues about why change should not be pursued. "Well look, obviously the report's just come out. Everyone can now review it and form an opinion. But certainly I have a strong view and I'm certainly happy to discuss that with others." Mr Goodenough admitted Mr Turnbull and the Cabinet would have a tough job deciding which side to take. "I think it will be a balancing act between those with multicultural electorates and those who are more conservative," he said. Cabinet will now consider the report. Any changes to the law it decides to pursue needs to go through a long committee and partyroom process before the big challenge of getting it through the Parliament. From other news sites: The Guardian: Liberal infighting begins after 18C report fails to suggest major changes to race hate laws Katherine Times: Free speech inquiry stops short of recommending major changes to 18C race hate laws Huffington Post: 'Huge FAIL' As No Changes To 18C Recommended By Parliament Committee SBS: 18C inquiry leans in favour of 'mainstream Australians' as no major changes proposed The Australian: 18C review strands Malcolm Turnbull in party row |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Aussie on Mar 21st, 2017 at 7:11pm |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by Gnads on Mar 21st, 2017 at 7:22pm
Why was Toben ordered to face court?
Obviously he was jailed for contempt because he refused to front but if 18c is so benign why did he have to front court for his opinion in the first place? Seems like a manipulation of the law ..... if we can't get him under 18c we'll take this tack............ seems like a form of entrapment Either way it is derived from 18c and his freedom of speech/opinion has been denied & he has been jailed as a consequence. |
Title: Re: the poster children for 18c Post by freediver on Mar 23rd, 2017 at 8:44am
It's worse than I thought:
Labor eyes extending 18C complaints http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/labor-eyes-extending-18c-complaints-to-gender-disability-and-age/news-story/366d04d0d5efb5fc6ef575e4e3550afc Labor is considering a secret plan to extend the reach of litigation based on section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act to include people claiming they have been offended or insulted because of their sexual orientation, disabilities or age. A video, obtained by The Australian, shows Labor legal affairs spokesman Mark Dreyfus last week explaining the proposal, which would lead to the Australian Human Rights Commission and the courts facing a new wave of complaints. Because Bill Shorten has rejected changes to 18C, there is a risk that Labor’s plan to consolidate all federal anti-discrimination laws will lead to litigation by the disabled and the LGBTI community that would be determined using the same procedures that apply under section 18C. The Australian can reveal that the amount of compensation paid as a result of race discrimination complaints to the Human Rights Commission has soared, with companies and governments handing over almost $1 million since 2010 to avoid going to court. Mr Dreyfus has confirmed that if Labor is elected to government he will be considering imposing a general standard for speech that infringes anti-discrimination law. Under Labor’s proposal, advocates of same-sex marriage would be empowered, for example, to take legal action under 18C-style laws if they felt offended or insulted by those who publicly defended the traditional definition of marriage. Those at risk would include priests, rabbis, imams and other religious leaders who publicly oppose same-sex marriage. Labor’s proposal also opens the prospect that debate over the cost of the National Disability Insurance Scheme could be truncated because of the risk of litigation by those who might feel offended or insulted. Mr Dreyfus outlined Labor’s thinking during a panel discussion on Wednesday last week with Liberal backbencher Tim Wilson, hosted by the Jewish Community Council of Victoria. In the video of the event, Mr Dreyfus said a Labor government hoped to consolidate all federal anti-discrimination legislation and would consider whether there should be a general standard for the type of speech that would attract liability under that law. At the moment, separate federal laws make it unlawful to discriminate against people because of their race, age, sex and sexual orientation, disability and indigeneity. When Mr Dreyfus was asked by an audience member if section 18C should be extended to cover gender and disability, he said Mr Wilson had reminded him of the “failed project which I hope to return to of consolidating the five anti-discrimination statutes when we are next in government”. “One of the things we’ll be looking at is this very point of whether or not we should set a standard about speech generally,” Mr Dreyfus said. “I want to have standards set in a community which respect the dignity of every Australian. I think it’s very important and something to be fought for.” When asked yesterday about his remarks, Mr Dreyfus said Labor would never support changes to section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act. “The consolidation of discrimination law was a policy of the Gillard Labor government,” he said. “My discussion of this issue last week was clearly hypothetical, and is not relevant to the current proposed changes to section 18C which will do nothing but weaken protections against racial hate speech in this country.” Labor’s proposal has come to light at a time when the Australian Human Rights Commission is dealing with a surge in complaints by those claiming to have been offended and insulted under section 18C. Section 18C makes it unlawful to do anything that causes people to feel offended, insulted, humiliated or intimidated because of their race, colour or national or ethnic background. Under a plan unveiled by Malcolm Turnbull and Attorney-General George Brandis this would be changed to eliminate what they have described as an unnecessary restriction on freedom of speech. The proposed changes would impose liability only on those who intimidated or harassed others because of their race, colour or national or ethnic background. The government’s plan would also abandon the test for liability and require all disputes to be decided based on the standards of reasonable members of the community. This would overturn the current arrangement in which judges are required to adopt the perspective of reasonable representatives of those who complain. |
Australian Politics Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5.2! YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2024. All Rights Reserved. |