Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Poll Poll
Question: Do you support this law? [Vic RARTA 2001 S25(2)]

Yes    
  4 (44.4%)
No    
  5 (55.6%)
Undecided    
  0 (0.0%)




Total votes: 9
« Created by: freediver on: Sep 6th, 2017 at 6:55pm »

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 ... 17
Send Topic Print
Blair Cottrel (Read 33755 times)
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Blair Cottrel
Reply #105 - Jul 29th, 2017 at 7:40pm
 
freediver wrote on Jul 29th, 2017 at 10:17am:
polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 29th, 2017 at 9:40am:
now now I never said there was a "clear legal distinction". I said the law is clear on incitement being a crime. How that is interpreted is a completely different matter, and obviously a huge grey area.

freediver wrote on Jul 29th, 2017 at 9:17am:
If they are being violent, they fact that they are also inciting violence is kind of a moot point don't you think?


Obviously if they are literally assaulting someone(s) or damaging property, then they are breaking other laws and should be prosecuted for that. But that doesn't mean they can't also be prosecuted for incitement at the same time.

As for Blair Cottrel, from what I understand he did a mock beheading as some sort of warning to or about muslims. I can understand why the authorities saw this as something more than just some artistic expression. I think its reasonable to interpret as inherently intimidating and threatening. In which case it was probably correct to charge him for it.


Who do you think was being threatened by the video?


muslims, obviously.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Blair Cottrel
Reply #106 - Jul 30th, 2017 at 7:11am
 
I'm pretty sure the intention was to highlight the tendency of Muslims to behead people, not to threaten Muslims with beheading.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Blair Cottrel
Reply #107 - Jul 30th, 2017 at 8:34am
 
freediver wrote on Jul 30th, 2017 at 7:11am:
I'm pretty sure the intention was to highlight the tendency of Muslims to behead people, not to threaten Muslims with beheading.


The video doesn't have to threaten muslims with beheading to still be threatening to muslims.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Blair Cottrel
Reply #108 - Jul 30th, 2017 at 8:47am
 
How is it threatening to them?

He was not charged with threatening by the way. He was charged with acting with an intention to incite ridicule.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Blair Cottrel
Reply #109 - Jul 30th, 2017 at 8:50am
 
freediver wrote on Jul 30th, 2017 at 8:47am:
How is it threatening to them?


Put it in your wiki FD, and falsely attribute it to muslims en masse, and have a jolly laugh about it.

....or you could work it out for yourself.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Blair Cottrel
Reply #110 - Jul 30th, 2017 at 8:54am
 
Was he threatening to act with the intention of inciting ridicule of Muslims?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Blair Cottrel
Reply #111 - Sep 5th, 2017 at 9:55pm
 
Here is the video:



What do you think of the outcome of the court case Gandalf? Should it be illegal to make videos mocking Muslim terrorists?

Far-right nationalists found guilty of inciting serious contempt for Muslims after mock beheading video

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-05/three-men-found-guilty-of-inciting-serious-contempt-for-muslims/8874804

Three far-right nationalists who staged a mock beheading to protest against the building of a mosque in Bendigo in central Victoria have been found guilty of inciting serious contempt of Muslims.

Blair Cottrell, Christopher Shortis and Neil Erikson have each been fined $2,000 after they filmed the beheading of a mannequin with a toy sword outside the Bendigo council offices in 2015.

The so-called 'Bendigo Three' argued that their video, which was released on the United Patriot's Front Facebook page, was an act of free speech that focused on a specific tenet of Islam.

But the magistrate disagreed, arguing the video was clearly intended to create serious contempt for or ridicule of Muslims.

"We live in a community which is inclusive and that each individual deserves the right to live their life peacefully," Magistrate Peter Hardy said.

"You more than just crossed a line."

It is the first time a criminal charge under Victoria's Racial and Religious Tolerance Act has been tested in court.

Other charges relating to damaging public property were struck out.

The three men have since told the media that they intend to appeal the decision, saying they "expected" the outcome.

On the first day of the hearing, anti-racism protesters clashed with far-right nationalists outside court, forcing police to intervene.

Before the verdict, Cottrell told the court the matter "set a dangerous precedent for the state", saying the video was a form of free speech.

"It was aimed at a tenet of a religion, not a whole class of people," Cottrell said.

He added that the group could not control who watched the video and therefore target audience was "subjective".

"Conclusion drawn from watching the video is out of my control," Cottrell said.

But the prosecution said the video was clearly intended to create "serious contempt" towards Muslims, given the video's target audience and the fact it coincided with a campaign to stop the building of a mosque.

"They're picking up the acts of criminals … and purporting that to arouse hatred of Muslims in general," prosecutor Fran Dalziel told court.

She added the law did not require the prosecution to establish whether people's views changed as a result of the video, but rather to establish the intention.

"They were playing to the camera," Ms Dalziel said.

Professor Spencer Zifcak, the former president of Liberty Victoria, said he did not expect the decision would set any significant precedent.

"It's been well recognised for a long time that in international law and in domestic law in Australia, in relation to racial vilification, that hate speech of whatever kind ought not to be justified or covered just by saying its an example free speech," he said.

But he said the case showed that free speech also included "symbolic speech".

"They [the accused] weren't actually talking, this was a mock production … it was a symbol of somebody's head being cut off, but that's just as much speech as oral or written speech," he said.

"That's something that now can be established after this particular case."
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
sir prince duke alevine
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male
Re: Blair Cottrel
Reply #112 - Sep 5th, 2017 at 9:57pm
 
Another reason why we need freedom of speech inscribed in our constitution or via bill of rights. It is outrageous to suggest a person can be fined because someone got upset over an obvious fictional video.
Back to top
 

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Blair Cottrel
Reply #113 - Sep 5th, 2017 at 9:59pm
 
I don't see the difference between this video and The Life of Brian. Since when is it illegal to make fun of people in Australia?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 39921
Gender: male
Re: Blair Cottrel
Reply #114 - Sep 5th, 2017 at 10:16pm
 
freediver wrote on Sep 5th, 2017 at 9:59pm:
I don't see the difference between this video and The Life of Brian. Since when is it illegal to make fun of people in Australia?

Since you have to think of Muslims. They are not ordinary 'people'.

How very dare you.
Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Blair Cottrel
Reply #115 - Sep 6th, 2017 at 3:14pm
 
freediver wrote on Sep 5th, 2017 at 9:55pm:
Should it be illegal to make videos mocking Muslim terrorists?


Interesting that you assert this is what the video was about - given that it was specifically done as a protest to the construction of a mosque. Where do you get the link between mocking terrorists and opposing a new mosque? Its only possible to make such a link if you are somehow suggesting the new mosque will be connected with terrorism. The video was implying that with a new mosque comes more terrorism. It was directly associating the entire muslim community with terrorism. That, I believe is what the court meant when they said it was holding muslim in contempt. And when this contempt comes in the form of such a violent and graphic demonstration, I think this is very sinister indeed.

Clearly the verdict was made with the context of the mosque protest in mind. Had it been as you claimed, nothing but mocking muslim terrorists (as opposed to blatantly associating the entire muslim community with terrorism), nothing would have happened.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
Secret Wars
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 3928
Gender: male
Re: Blair Cottrel
Reply #116 - Sep 6th, 2017 at 3:30pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 6th, 2017 at 3:14pm:
It was directly associating the entire muslim community with terrorism.


What does holding up signs saying "behead those who insult the prophet" or driving into crowds of people or blowing people up associate Muslims with?

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
mothra
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 34374
Gender: female
Re: Blair Cottrel
Reply #117 - Sep 6th, 2017 at 3:33pm
 
Secret Wars wrote on Sep 6th, 2017 at 3:30pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 6th, 2017 at 3:14pm:
It was directly associating the entire muslim community with terrorism.


What does holding up signs saying "behead those who insult the prophet" or driving into crowds of people or blowing people up associate Muslims with?



Nothing, to a reasonable, rational person. They understand immediately that most Muslims don't do those things and that those things are done by people who aren't Muslim.
Back to top
 

If you can't be a good example, you have to be a horrible warning.
 
IP Logged
 
Secret Wars
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 3928
Gender: male
Re: Blair Cottrel
Reply #118 - Sep 6th, 2017 at 3:35pm
 
mothra wrote on Sep 6th, 2017 at 3:33pm:
Secret Wars wrote on Sep 6th, 2017 at 3:30pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 6th, 2017 at 3:14pm:
It was directly associating the entire muslim community with terrorism.


What does holding up signs saying "behead those who insult the prophet" or driving into crowds of people or blowing people up associate Muslims with?



Nothing, to a reasonable, rational person. They understand immediately that most Muslims don't do those things and that those things are done by people who aren't Muslim.


Ahhh yes, the old got nuffin to do wiv Islam.   Grin Grin

And has nuffin to do wiv associating Muslims with terrorists.

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
mothra
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 34374
Gender: female
Re: Blair Cottrel
Reply #119 - Sep 6th, 2017 at 3:38pm
 
Was that honestly the most in depth you could manage?
Back to top
 

If you can't be a good example, you have to be a horrible warning.
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 ... 17
Send Topic Print