Australian Politics Forum
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl
General Discussion >> General Board >> 18 c lies and more lies.
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1481368467

Message started by australia-screwed on Dec 10th, 2016 at 9:14pm

Title: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by australia-screwed on Dec 10th, 2016 at 9:14pm
what a load of bullshit from these morons wanting to change 18 c .    can you imagine if you asked oliver and hardy barnardi or george branded when was the last time you had a black or muslum round your house for a bbq.   and when was the last time you were round thers.  and what did they think of this 18c poo.   if these questions where asked these morons would have heart palpatations.   this is all part of the plan from the monks disciples to make poor mall look like a glove puppet and also agree with the morons.  just about every week the disciples will come out and go to change policy so mall will again change his mind .  and each week the polls will slip down and down .  then the bed pissers will start to rattle worried about there high paid jobs and huge pensions..then there constituency will ask what is going on this yes minister mall is going against every thing he believes in.  then the numbers will start.   then who will we vote for .  remember i told you in my other blogs mall made mugs out of the other contenders.   sorryson  mutton barny rubble .      so the bedpissers will say who can we put in remember the cupboard is bare..enter da monk that bet looks good.   regarding 18c the right wing morons will poo when the words of the jewish  vote start to voice there anger these clowns will clam up quick smart.   and if you think this will never happen again but your not a back bencher the polls will push this  be lucky :D ;)

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by freediver on Dec 11th, 2016 at 8:39am
Have you ever tried asking a Muslim what they think of 18c?

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Dnarever on Dec 11th, 2016 at 8:57am
Does anyone know what the problem is with 18c ?

Or what the suggested fix actually is ?

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by freediver on Dec 11th, 2016 at 9:04am
The problem is that it is a direct attack on freedom of speech. The solution is to get rid of it.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Dnarever on Dec 11th, 2016 at 9:14am

freediver wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 9:04am:
The problem is that it is a direct attack on freedom of speech. The solution is to get rid of it.


I don't agree that it is a freedom of speech issue at all.

Much speech is already impinged in other areas.

Protecting people from racial vilification is not a bad thing.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by freediver on Dec 11th, 2016 at 9:33am
What about protecting people from perceived insult? Should we have the right not to be offended, and do you see that as an attack on freedom of speech?

How do all the other attacks on freedom of speech make this somehow not an attack on freedom of speech? Do we cease attacking freedom of speech when we attack it on several fronts?

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by The_Barnacle on Dec 11th, 2016 at 9:34am
And do those who oppose 18c actually realize that 18D protects their freedom of speech.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by freediver on Dec 11th, 2016 at 9:37am
That is a common fallacy promoted by the supporters of 18c. An Australian man was put in jail for denying the holocaust because of 18c. He was not protected by 18d. 18d talks a lot about 'fair comment'. However, anyone who becomes a victim of this sort of attack on freedom of speech is obviously going to be part of a very unpopular minority whose opinions are considered unfair by the dominant majority. 18d only protects people who have nothing to fear from 18c to begin with.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by John Smith on Dec 11th, 2016 at 10:24am

freediver wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 9:33am:
What about protecting people from perceived insult?



says the guy who wants to ban someone for holding up 'behead the infidel'  placards ...

not such a fan of free speech after all are you!

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by freediver on Dec 11th, 2016 at 10:34am
That was Gandalf John, not me.

Not that this has anything to do with whether people have the right not to be offended. Do you have an opinion on 18c John?

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by John Smith on Dec 11th, 2016 at 10:37am

freediver wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 10:34am:
That was Gandalf John, not me.

Not that this has anything to do with whether people have the right not to be offended. Do you have an opinion on 18c John?



sure it was

And I don't have a problem with 18c ... it's been around for 20 yrs and no one had a problem until the retards fan boy, Bolt, got in trouble for lying.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by freediver on Dec 11th, 2016 at 10:40am
Do you think the guy who got jailed for denying the holocaust had a problem with the laws?

Is it OK to destroy freedom of speech if no-one cares about the victims?

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by John Smith on Dec 11th, 2016 at 10:42am

freediver wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 10:40am:
Do you think the guy who got jailed for denying the holocaust had a problem with the laws?

Is it OK to destroy freedom of speech if no-one cares about the victims?



I'm not familiar with the case so can't comment on it specifically.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by The_Barnacle on Dec 11th, 2016 at 10:45am

freediver wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 9:37am:
An Australian man was put in jail for denying the holocaust because of 18c. He was not protected by 18d.


Do you have a link for that?

The only similar case I could find was Gerald Fredrick Töben who was jailed in 2009 for contempt of court

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Fredrick_T%C3%B6ben

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Aussie on Dec 11th, 2016 at 10:50am

John Smith wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 10:42am:

freediver wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 10:40am:
Do you think the guy who got jailed for denying the holocaust had a problem with the laws?

Is it OK to destroy freedom of speech if no-one cares about the victims?



I'm not familiar with the case so can't comment on it specifically.


I am, and this has been debated to death in FD's Thread he 'stickied' all over the Forum.

The bloke was jailed for contempt of Court in that he defied a Court Order to cease publishing certain material (which was anti holocaust propaganda.)  He had first published that material.  He was not done under 18C for that, he was ordered by the Court to cease doing so.  He defied that order, continued publishing, and was jailed for contempt of Court.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by John Smith on Dec 11th, 2016 at 10:56am
Does FD think we should revoke 'contempt of court' legislation too?

It would seem that if his concern was Tobin, that should be the legislation he should be targeting, instead of lying about 18c.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by freediver on Dec 11th, 2016 at 11:07am

The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 10:45am:

freediver wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 9:37am:
An Australian man was put in jail for denying the holocaust because of 18c. He was not protected by 18d.


Do you have a link for that?

The only similar case I could find was Gerald Fredrick Töben who was jailed in 2009 for contempt of court

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Fredrick_T%C3%B6ben


That's the one. The contempt took the form of denying the holocaust, in violation of 18c. Here is some previous discussion:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1480201952/11#11

Aussie tried the same BS there. Before he leads you up the garden path, it turns out Aussie agrees that he was jailed for not refraining from denying the holocaust, but still insists it is "a blatant lie of the most scurrilous kind" to say instead that he was jailed for denying the holocaust. To support this, he presented evidence that concluded that Toben was jailed for denying the holocaust (without Aussie's absurd distinction that he was jailed for not refraining from doing so).


Quote:
It would seem that if his concern was Tobin, that should be the legislation he should be targeting, instead of lying about 18c


That is even more stupid than Aussie's argument.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Karnal on Dec 11th, 2016 at 11:10am

freediver wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 8:39am:
Have you ever tried asking a Muslim what they think of 18c?


Try asking FD.

You'll be waiting a while.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Karnal on Dec 11th, 2016 at 11:12am

freediver wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 9:04am:
The problem is that it is a direct attack on freedom of speech. The solution is to get rid of it.


Yes, that's what Andrew Bolt says.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Karnal on Dec 11th, 2016 at 11:15am

freediver wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 9:37am:
That is a common fallacy promoted by the supporters of 18c. An Australian man was put in jail for denying the holocaust because of 18c. He was not protected by 18d. 18d talks a lot about 'fair comment'. However, anyone who becomes a victim of this sort of attack on freedom of speech is obviously going to be part of a very unpopular minority whose opinions are considered unfair by the dominant majority. 18d only protects people who have nothing to fear from 18c to begin with.


It doesn't prevent your Freeeeedom from telling porkies like this, FD. You know why.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by The_Barnacle on Dec 11th, 2016 at 11:26am

freediver wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 11:07am:

The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 10:45am:

freediver wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 9:37am:
An Australian man was put in jail for denying the holocaust because of 18c. He was not protected by 18d.


Do you have a link for that?

The only similar case I could find was Gerald Fredrick Töben who was jailed in 2009 for contempt of court

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Fredrick_T%C3%B6ben


That's the one. The contempt took the form of denying the holocaust, in violation of 18c.


But he was actually jailed for contempt of court. I'm glad that's cleared up.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by John Smith on Dec 11th, 2016 at 11:27am

The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 11:26am:
But he was actually jailed for contempt of court. I'm glad that's cleared up.



that won't stop FD from using it in his agenda to get rid of 18C

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Karnal on Dec 11th, 2016 at 11:43am

The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 11:26am:

freediver wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 11:07am:
[quote author=Oh_Yeah link=1481368467/13#13 date=1481417150][quote author=freediver link=1481368467/7#7 date=1481413043] An Australian man was put in jail for denying the holocaust because of 18c. He was not protected by 18d.


Do you have a link for that?

The only similar case I could find was Gerald Fredrick Töben who was jailed in 2009 for contempt of court

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Fredrick_T%C3%B6ben


FD knows all that. He pretends to ignore posts that don't conform to his views.

You know, implausible deniability.

FD knows all about Tobin. FD's just playing dumb. He thinks this will get him out of a charge of porkies which, as we all know, FD refuses to refrain from it his campaign against the Muselman.

FD is one of the few posters here who reserves the right to tell porkies pies in order to vilify racial, cultural and religious groups. Of course he'd want to change 18C.

FD is a propagandist who's sole purpose here is to ban a certain religious group.

And just think, he started this board to do the exact opposite.

What could Abu possibly have said to have changed FD so?

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by freediver on Dec 11th, 2016 at 12:37pm

The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 11:26am:

freediver wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 11:07am:

The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 10:45am:

freediver wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 9:37am:
An Australian man was put in jail for denying the holocaust because of 18c. He was not protected by 18d.


Do you have a link for that?

The only similar case I could find was Gerald Fredrick Töben who was jailed in 2009 for contempt of court

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Fredrick_T%C3%B6ben


That's the one. The contempt took the form of denying the holocaust, in violation of 18c.


But he was actually jailed for contempt of court. I'm glad that's cleared up.


According to Aussie, he was jailed for not refraining from denying the holocaust.

How do you think he came to be facing a court order, and what do you think he did that violated it?

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Karnal on Dec 11th, 2016 at 12:42pm
Why don't you say what Aussie really said, FD? We've all read it.

Too hard?

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Dnarever on Dec 11th, 2016 at 12:50pm

freediver wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 9:33am:
What about protecting people from perceived insult? Should we have the right not to be offended, and do you see that as an attack on freedom of speech?

How do all the other attacks on freedom of speech make this somehow not an attack on freedom of speech? Do we cease attacking freedom of speech when we attack it on several fronts?


18c is more about penalising the misuse or abuse of freedom of speech

You are not going to claim that what Bold did was ok are you ?

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Brian Ross on Dec 11th, 2016 at 2:26pm

The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 10:45am:

freediver wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 9:37am:
An Australian man was put in jail for denying the holocaust because of 18c. He was not protected by 18d.


Do you have a link for that?

The only similar case I could find was Gerald Fredrick Töben who was jailed in 2009 for contempt of court

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Fredrick_T%C3%B6ben



Seems to me that the critics of 18c like to tell lies about past court cases that had absolutely nothing to do with section 18c of the Racial Discrimination Act.   I wonder why?  Do you think lying?    ::) ::)

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by freediver on Dec 11th, 2016 at 6:51pm

Dnarever wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 12:50pm:

freediver wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 9:33am:
What about protecting people from perceived insult? Should we have the right not to be offended, and do you see that as an attack on freedom of speech?

How do all the other attacks on freedom of speech make this somehow not an attack on freedom of speech? Do we cease attacking freedom of speech when we attack it on several fronts?


18c is more about penalising the misuse or abuse of freedom of speech

You are not going to claim that what Bold did was ok are you ?


It has nothing to do with whether you agree with it or the moral value you place on what is said.

The only real test of a person's support for freedom of speech is their willingness to stick to their principles when they don't like what is being said. 'Misuse' of freedom of speech is another word for not actually supporting freedom of speech.


Quote:
Seems to me that the critics of 18c like to tell lies about past court cases that had absolutely nothing to do with section 18c of the Racial Discrimination Act.   I wonder why?  Do you think lying?


Are you suggesting Toben's jailing had nothing to do with 18c? Every time I think these arguments can't get any more stupid, you prove me wrong.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by John Smith on Dec 11th, 2016 at 7:10pm

freediver wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 6:51pm:
Are you suggesting Toben's jailing had nothing to do with 18c?



it had to do with being in contempt of court.

Why don't you petition to have contempt of court laws changed or revoked?

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Gnads on Dec 11th, 2016 at 7:28pm
Here's why 18C should get the heave ho

another case of vexatious complaint that was in affect

a lie. Perceived insult/racial discrimination.

I hope she does go bankrupt.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/qut-case-cindy-prior-must-pay-students-200000plus/news-story/438d7814ebde35825a5c51e4c77e6902


Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Aussie on Dec 11th, 2016 at 7:31pm

Gnads wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 7:28pm:
Here's why 18C should get the heave ho

another case of vexatious complaint that was in affect

a lie. Perceived insult/racial discrimination.

I hope she does go bankrupt.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/qut-case-cindy-prior-must-pay-students-200000plus/news-story/438d7814ebde35825a5c51e4c77e6902


Paywall.

Anyway, I know the case, and it is not 'another' one.  It is the same one which has already been discussed here a month or so ago.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Gnads on Dec 11th, 2016 at 7:45pm

Aussie wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 7:31pm:

Gnads wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 7:28pm:
Here's why 18C should get the heave ho

another case of vexatious complaint that was in affect

a lie. Perceived insult/racial discrimination.

I hope she does go bankrupt.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/qut-case-cindy-prior-must-pay-students-200000plus/news-story/438d7814ebde35825a5c51e4c77e6902


Paywall.

Anyway, I know the case, and it is not 'another' one.  It is the same one which has already been discussed here a month or so ago.



Aussie who gives a flying ferck

I didn't see nor was I part of that discussion.

Blank off.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Karnal on Dec 11th, 2016 at 7:46pm

John Smith wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 7:10pm:

freediver wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 6:51pm:
Are you suggesting Toben's jailing had nothing to do with 18c?



it had to do with being in contempt of court.

Why don't you petition to have contempt of court laws changed or revoked?


Are they tinted?

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by The Grappler on Dec 12th, 2016 at 6:23am

Gnads wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 7:28pm:
Here's why 18C should get the heave ho

another case of vexatious complaint that was in affect

a lie. Perceived insult/racial discrimination.

I hope she does go bankrupt.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/qut-case-cindy-prior-must-pay-students-200000plus/news-story/438d7814ebde35825a5c51e4c77e6902



It's time this kind of Vexatious Litigation was brought under proper control - is this a sign of a very faint light at the end of the forty years of wandering in the wilderness in the West?

I, for one, am sick and tired of always being labeled 'the aggressor' or 'the racist' or everything else, simply because I'm a White Man..... and watching countless billions poured into government agencies set up or ordered to deliberately focus ONLY on the Rights ™ of specified 'Accredited Victim Status' groups while waging a campaign of terror on the rest, up to and including false imprisonment on the basis of someone's 'feelings'.

How The West Was Lost....



... needs to include a close and introspective look at our social decline over the same time span.....

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Gordon on Dec 12th, 2016 at 7:16am

Gnads wrote on Dec 11th, 2016 at 7:28pm:
Here's why 18C should get the heave ho

another case of vexatious complaint that was in affect

a lie. Perceived insult/racial discrimination.

I hope she does go bankrupt.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/qut-case-cindy-prior-must-pay-students-200000plus/news-story/438d7814ebde35825a5c51e4c77e6902



Section 18C complainant Cindy Prior faces being pursued into bankruptcy after a judge ordered she pay an estimated $200,000 in legal costs for three QUT students who were accused of racial hatred over Facebook posts.

Ms Prior, on stress leave since late May 2013 from the Queensland University of Technology’s indigenous-only Oodgeroo Unit, was in talks with her solicitor, Susan Moriarty, after judge ­Michael Jarrett made his finding in the Federal Circuit Court in Brisbane late yesterday.

Judge Jarrett rejected arguments by Ms Prior’s barrister, Susan Anderson, including that the ill-fated and controversial legal action to win $250,000 compensation from the students should be treated differently because it was brought in the public interest.

The judge, who last month dismissed Ms Prior’s section 18C ­Racial Discrimination Act case against the students as having “no reasonable prospects of success”, made a distinction between public interest litigation and the personal financial benefit she sought as compensation.

Tony Morris QC, the barrister who had promised two of the students, Calum Thwaites and Alex Wood, that he would charge no fees or disbursements unless costs could be recovered from the other side, told The Weekend Australian that all the legal costs would be calculated and delivered in a bill to Ms Prior’s legal team.

“If Ms Prior cannot pay the costs, she will be bankrupted — and if she recovers any money from QUT, the trustee in bankruptcy will be asked to make a claim on those funds to pay her legal costs,’’ he said.

Ms Prior is continuing an ­action for $250,000 damages against QUT over the way it ­handled the Facebook saga.

Costs were awarded on an indemnity basis, meaning the sum will be significantly higher in relation to Mr Wood because he had offered to settle the case in March with an apology but no payment.

Judge Jarrett said: “Costs should follow the event. This is not a ‘no costs’ jurisdiction. The proceedings were commenced in this court by Ms Prior. It was her decision.”

While Ms Prior faces financial ruin unless she can raise the money, her solicitor was spared the rare ignominy of being ­ordered to pay costs personally.

Judge Jarrett said as the case was not completely “hopeless”, he rejected a bid by Mr Wood’s ­barrister, Michael Henry, to have costs awarded against Ms Moriarty.

Mr Wood will have to find an estimated $15,000 to pay for the failed bid.

During legal argument yesterday, Mr Morris said his client Mr Thwaites had “done nothing wrong whatsoever” and had not written anything offensive on Facebook, while Jackson Powell had merely made a “poor attempt at humour” with his post: “I wonder where the white supremacist lab is.”

Mr Morris told Judge Jarrett that in the build-up of the case, which was with the Human Rights Commission for 14 months, the students were “held to ransom to get $5000 (from each) for a fighting fund”.

Mr Powell’s Facebook post came after Mr Wood wrote: “Just got kicked out of the unsigned ­indigenous computer room. QUT stopping segregation with segregation?”

Mr Wood wrote it shortly after he was ejected from the Oodgeroo Unit by Ms Prior after she had asked him whether he was indigenous. Judge Jarrett found that Mr Wood’s words “were rallying against racial discrimination” and not a breach of section 18C, which makes it unlawful to cause offence or humiliation on the basis of race.

Judge Jarrett also rejected Ms Prior’s attempt to press ahead with a subpoena to Facebook to try to discover the identity of someone who wrote a post with the word “black people”. He has previously found that Mr Thwaites, who attended court yesterday, had not posted the term.

Ms Prior’s lawyers raised several arguments to try to avoid a costs order, citing the public interest in section 18C, but Mr Wood’s barrister, Anthony Collins, said the racial vilification allegations she levelled were “of the highest level of seriousness”, lacked merit and involved an unreasonable pursuit. He told the court: “In a clinical and objective way, they could never have succeeded. There was an absence of scrutiny by Ms ­Moriarty.”

Ms Moriarty’s barrister, Damien O’Brien QC, said it was a serious and wrong claim that Ms Moriarty had “thought up, crafted and brought the case” for an ­ulterior purpose, and she should be given the benefit of doubt.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Gordon on Dec 12th, 2016 at 9:13am
3 years stress leave. She sounds like a professional scammer.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Frank on Dec 17th, 2016 at 3:06pm
Lawyers for Cindy Prior want a judge to find it is illegal under section 18C to “say or do anything” which calls into question the ­appropriateness of special measures which advantage an ethnic or ­racial minority, the Federal Court heard yesterday.

The legal argument is at the heart of an attempted appeal by Ms Prior after the indigenous former Queensland University of Technology administrative assistant’s racial hatred case against students over Facebook posts was thrown out, with more than $200,000 in costs awarded against her.

Judge John Dowsett asked Ms Prior’s barrister Greg McIntyre SC: “Does that mean then that people can’t refer in any adverse way to any form of discrimination?”

Mr McIntyre replied in the ­affirmative,
saying it could be unlawful under section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act if such comments caused humiliation or intimidation to reasonable members of a group such as indigenous students of QUT. “I can’t see that opposing segregation is saying something about race,’’ Justice Dowsett said. “It’s about human attitudes, isn’t it?”

Tony Morris QC, the lawyer for students Jackson Powell and Calum Thwaites, described the arguments of Ms Prior’s legal team as wrong “in all of their ­glorious absurdity and monstrosity”.



...



Ms Prior had argued she was unable to continue working face-to-face with white people following a series of Facebook posts made after Mr Wood was asked to leave an indigenous-only computer lab at the QUT in 2013.

Cindy Prior with a white person.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/blogs/tim-blair/cindy-binned/news-story/9286edaba86b1ffe180644c81ad49d90

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Frank on Dec 17th, 2016 at 3:19pm
Imagine if a white person said he can't work face to face with Aborigines or Indians or Africans and demanded compensation for being forced to work with them.

Imagine.

But it's OK for an Aboriginal person to say, in support of her claim for compensation, that she cannot work with white people.
And now her appeals lawyer says that people should not be able to criticise any discrimination.

"Mr Morris [the students' QC] said if Ms Prior’s ­arguments were correct, “nobody in Australia from the prime minister down to the humblest man in the street is entitled even to ask the question whether a ‘special measure’ is justified or not”.

What is put against Mr Wood and Mr Powell is that they breached federal law because they rallied against discrimin­ation; because they say discrim­ination is bad, they are liable to a claim of a quarter of a million dollars to Ms Prior. It’s a nonsense,’’ Mr Morris said. “It’s plain that this is not what the legislation was ever intended to do. There have been enough resources wasted on this ­litigation.”

Mr Morris argued that if Australians could not “rally against discrimination’ without risking a breach of section 18C, it logically followed that there could not be criticism of a whites-only computer lab for discriminating against other races and ethnic minorities."

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Aussie on Dec 17th, 2016 at 3:20pm
:o

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Karnal on Dec 17th, 2016 at 3:55pm

Frank wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 3:19pm:
Imagine if a white person said he can't work face to face with Aborigines or Indians or Africans and demanded compensation for being forced to work with them.

Imagine.

But it's OK for an Aboriginal person to say, in support of her claim for compensation, that she cannot work with white people.
And now her appeals lawyer says that people should not be able to criticise any discrimination.


Of course it's not okay, it's ludicrous.

She lost her case, by the way.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Aussie on Dec 17th, 2016 at 3:58pm

Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 3:55pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 3:19pm:
Imagine if a white person said he can't work face to face with Aborigines or Indians or Africans and demanded compensation for being forced to work with them.

Imagine.

But it's OK for an Aboriginal person to say, in support of her claim for compensation, that she cannot work with white people.
And now her appeals lawyer says that people should not be able to criticise any discrimination.


Of course it's not okay, it's ludicrous.

She lost her case, by the way.


I reckon Frank had no idea about that outcome.  Hence my  :o

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Mr Hammer on Dec 17th, 2016 at 3:59pm
Why did Gillian Trigg's push this load of crap case so far?

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Karnal on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:01pm

Mr Hammer wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 3:59pm:
Why did Gillian Trigg's push this load of crap case so far?


Gillian Triggs had nothing to do with the case, dear.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Mr Hammer on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:10pm

HUMAN Rights Commissioner Gillian Triggs should resign for allowing an untenable racial discrimination case against three Queensland university students to get as far as the Federal Court, a QC says.

Queensland University of Technology students Alex Wood, Calum Thwaites and Jackson Powell were being sued by Cindy Prior, an indigenous administration officer, under the Racial Discrimination Act’s controversial section 18C. The $250,000 lawsuit was thrown out by Brisbane’s Federal Court Judge Michael Jarrett on Friday after he found Ms Prior did not have reasonable prospects of successfully bringing a case against the trio.

Outside court, Mr Thwaites’ lawyer, Tony Morris QC, slammed Professor Triggs for allowing the case to get so far.

Mr Morris said Prof Triggs sat on the case against the students for 14 months before they were told a complaint had been made against them, and no inquiries were made.

He said the commissioner should have told Ms Prior there was no substance to her claim and dismissed the complaint.

“Triggs takes $400,000 a year out of the pockets of the taxpayers of this country for a job she doesn’t bother to do,” Mr Morris said. “If the woman had any decency whatsoever, her resignation would be on the attorney-general’s desk on Monday.” Mr Thwaites said he was extremely relieved at the outcome and happy to be able to get on with his life.

Ms Prior was not in court for the judgment and is said to be facing a six-figure bill if the students recoup their legal costs from her.

She had argued she was unable to continue working face-to-face with white people following a series of Facebook posts made after Mr Wood was asked to leave an indigenous-only computer lab at the QUT in 2013.

“Just got kicked out of the unsigned indigenous computer room. QUT stopping segregation with segregation,” he wrote.




–– ADVERTISEMENT ––iThe post attracted a number of responses, including one from Mr Powell who wrote: “I wonder where the white supremacist computer lab is.” Mr Thwaites is alleged to have written “ITT (N-word)” but has denied being responsible for the post.

Several other students have settled with Ms Prior out of court, reportedly for $5000 each, while QUT is still subject to a lawsuit.

The university released a statement late on Friday saying it was pleased the matter had been resolved “as far as the three students are concerned and regrets that the issue has taken so long to come to a conclusion for them”. The case has been a rallying point for opponents of 18C, which makes it unlawful to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people. On Friday, Victorian Liberal senator James Paterson joined the growing number of voices calling a parliamentary inquiry into changing the law. Mr Paterson said while he was relieved the judge had found the students had no case to answer, they should never have endured such an appalling legal process. “This judgment doesn’t give them back that time, or their reputations, or the stress of having to endure these false allegations and defend themselves,” Mr Paterson said.

Institute of Public Affairs executive director John Roskam said the Turnbull government could no longer stick its head in the sand on section 18C. “The proof that the human rights regime is damaged beyond repair is now plain for all to see,” Mr Roskam said.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by gandalf on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:47pm
18c should remove the words "offend" and "insult", but the reality is it doesn't preclude bigoted speech that isn't based on complete fabrications (as was the case with Bolt). Bill Leak wasn't gagged for his cartoons, despite the fact that we know they "offended" lots of Aboriginal people. I suspect you can pretty much say whatever racist vile rubbish you like as long as its not directly threatening someone. The sole exception to this of course is holocaust denial - which our own first law officer has stated is de-facto a case of racial vilification. And I'm certain removing the words "offend" and "insult" won't change this. But removing racial vilification laws entirely just to stop the gagging of holocaust denial is not the solution. In this case common sense should prevail and a legitimate historical debate about holocaust denial should not be considered racial vilification.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Karnal on Dec 17th, 2016 at 5:21pm

Mr Hammer wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:10pm:
HUMAN Rights Commissioner Gillian Triggs should resign for allowing an untenable racial discrimination case against three Queensland university students to get as far as the Federal Court, a QC says.

Queensland University of Technology students Alex Wood, Calum Thwaites and Jackson Powell were being sued by Cindy Prior, an indigenous administration officer, under the Racial Discrimination Act’s controversial section 18C. The $250,000 lawsuit was thrown out by Brisbane’s Federal Court Judge Michael Jarrett on Friday after he found Ms Prior did not have reasonable prospects of successfully bringing a case against the trio.

Outside court, Mr Thwaites’ lawyer, Tony Morris QC, slammed Professor Triggs for allowing the case to get so far.

Mr Morris said Prof Triggs sat on the case against the students for 14 months before they were told a complaint had been made against them, and no inquiries were made.

He said the commissioner should have told Ms Prior there was no substance to her claim and dismissed the complaint.

“Triggs takes $400,000 a year out of the pockets of the taxpayers of this country for a job she doesn’t bother to do,” Mr Morris said. “If the woman had any decency whatsoever, her resignation would be on the attorney-general’s desk on Monday.” Mr Thwaites said he was extremely relieved at the outcome and happy to be able to get on with his life.

Ms Prior was not in court for the judgment and is said to be facing a six-figure bill if the students recoup their legal costs from her.

She had argued she was unable to continue working face-to-face with white people following a series of Facebook posts made after Mr Wood was asked to leave an indigenous-only computer lab at the QUT in 2013.

“Just got kicked out of the unsigned indigenous computer room. QUT stopping segregation with segregation,” he wrote.




–– ADVERTISEMENT ––iThe post attracted a number of responses, including one from Mr Powell who wrote: “I wonder where the white supremacist computer lab is.” Mr Thwaites is alleged to have written “ITT (N-word)” but has denied being responsible for the post.

Several other students have settled with Ms Prior out of court, reportedly for $5000 each, while QUT is still subject to a lawsuit.

The university released a statement late on Friday saying it was pleased the matter had been resolved “as far as the three students are concerned and regrets that the issue has taken so long to come to a conclusion for them”. The case has been a rallying point for opponents of 18C, which makes it unlawful to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people. On Friday, Victorian Liberal senator James Paterson joined the growing number of voices calling a parliamentary inquiry into changing the law. Mr Paterson said while he was relieved the judge had found the students had no case to answer, they should never have endured such an appalling legal process. “This judgment doesn’t give them back that time, or their reputations, or the stress of having to endure these false allegations and defend themselves,” Mr Paterson said.

Institute of Public Affairs executive director John Roskam said the Turnbull government could no longer stick its head in the sand on section 18C. “The proof that the human rights regime is damaged beyond repair is now plain for all to see,” Mr Roskam said.


Good point, Homo. I got that wrong. Thanks for proving it.

You're right. 

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Frank on Dec 17th, 2016 at 7:53pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:47pm:
18c should remove the words "offend" and "insult", but the reality is it doesn't preclude bigoted speech that isn't based on complete fabrications (as was the case with Bolt). Bill Leak wasn't gagged for his cartoons, despite the fact that we know they "offended" lots of Aboriginal people. I suspect you can pretty much say whatever racist vile rubbish you like as long as its not directly threatening someone. The sole exception to this of course is holocaust denial - which our own first law officer has stated is de-facto a case of racial vilification. And I'm certain removing the words "offend" and "insult" won't change this. But removing racial vilification laws entirely just to stop the gagging of holocaust denial is not the solution. In this case common sense should prevail and a legitimate historical debate about holocaust denial should not be considered racial vilification.



Criminalising the denial of the Holocaust is stupid. It is done by the perpetrators of the Holocaust.

The Holocaust did happen and denying it something idiots do, many of whom are financed by Muslims and their puppeteers.

The supreme irony of your little ruse is that you want to stop the criminalisation of holocaust denial but you also want to avail your Muslim selves to the protections extended to Holocaust victims.

You want to be a Holocaust victim of the Jews but you want to deny the Jews their victimhood.

You think this clever but in reality it is cheap, stupid, grubby and chancy - chancy like most Arab/Muslim politics. You lack principle. You are all carpet merchants of politics - you can speak out of any number of the corners of your mouths.

In a way it is an indication between you Turks and the West. There is no common cultural ground for us. You are aliens for us and we are aliens for you.

That's why we do not want to migrate to your countries and that why you should be topped from migrating to ours. We bring nothing you want and you bring nothing we want.i



Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Karnal on Dec 17th, 2016 at 8:08pm

Frank wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 7:53pm:
We bring nothing you want and you bring nothing we want.


That's not fair, old boy, you brought your old cheese. Don't you be so hard on yourself.

Miam miam.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Frank on Dec 17th, 2016 at 9:21pm

Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 8:08pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 7:53pm:
We bring nothing you want and you bring nothing we want.


That's not fair, old boy, you brought your old cheese. Don't you be so hard on yourself.

Miam miam.

What do you like about Islam?  What does it add to your life that nothing else has?

Pederasty aside.



Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Yadda on Dec 17th, 2016 at 10:20pm

Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 3:55pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 3:19pm:
Imagine if a white person said he can't work face to face with Aborigines or Indians or Africans and demanded compensation for being forced to work with them.

Imagine.

But it's OK for an Aboriginal person to say, in support of her claim for compensation, that she cannot work with white people.
And now her appeals lawyer says that people should not be able to criticise any discrimination.


Of course it's not okay, it's ludicrous.

She lost her case, by the way.



Yadda is troubled.






Karnal,

PLEASE JUST TELL US ALL........

How is any reasonable person supposed to know and to understand, when any particular comment that you make in any post on OzPol,                    ......is being made as a serious reflection of your real views ?





http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1430391074/27#27

Dawud’s Delicious Dates? We prefer Sore End’s Scrumptious Stools.
Miam miam.





http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1473548261/7#7

"Kill them."




http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1467791959/45#45

"Save money. Kill all Moslems."





http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1450215682/1#1

Deport him, kill his children.




http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1450215682/5#5

We’re Christians.
Nuke them.





http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1450215682/12#12

dunno boges - I'm torn between suicide bombing the mufti's residence and shooting up his mosque - what do you suggest?






http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1431743069/44#44

[moslems in Australia] Slaughter them, sell the meat.




Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Karnal on Dec 17th, 2016 at 10:21pm

Frank wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 9:21pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 8:08pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 7:53pm:
We bring nothing you want and you bring nothing we want.


That's not fair, old boy, you brought your old cheese. Don't you be so hard on yourself.

Miam miam.

What do you like about Islam?  What does it add to your life that nothing else has?

Pederasty aside.


That's a tough one, old boy. What do mendacious old Lutherans add to our lives that nothing else has?

I'm curious.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Frank on Dec 18th, 2016 at 10:54am

Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 10:21pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 9:21pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 8:08pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 7:53pm:
We bring nothing you want and you bring nothing we want.


That's not fair, old boy, you brought your old cheese. Don't you be so hard on yourself.

Miam miam.

What do you like about Islam?  What does it add to your life that nothing else has?

Pederasty aside.


That's a tough one, old boy. What do mendacious old Lutherans add to our lives that nothing else has?

I'm curious.

A question in response to a question.

What is it about Islam that appeals to you so much? I can't think of any positive aspects to it. You?


Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Karnal on Dec 18th, 2016 at 12:34pm

Frank wrote on Dec 18th, 2016 at 10:54am:

Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 10:21pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 9:21pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 8:08pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 7:53pm:
We bring nothing you want and you bring nothing we want.


That's not fair, old boy, you brought your old cheese. Don't you be so hard on yourself.

Miam miam.

What do you like about Islam?  What does it add to your life that nothing else has?

Pederasty aside.


That's a tough one, old boy. What do mendacious old Lutherans add to our lives that nothing else has?

I'm curious.

A question in response to a question.

What is it about Islam that appeals to you so much? I can't think of any positive aspects to it. You?


Come on, out with it. What do Sore End's church picnics and hideous stool tarts add to our society?

No more stalling, old boy.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by freediver on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 10:50am

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:47pm:
18c should remove the words "offend" and "insult", but the reality is it doesn't preclude bigoted speech that isn't based on complete fabrications (as was the case with Bolt). Bill Leak wasn't gagged for his cartoons, despite the fact that we know they "offended" lots of Aboriginal people. I suspect you can pretty much say whatever racist vile rubbish you like as long as its not directly threatening someone. The sole exception to this of course is holocaust denial - which our own first law officer has stated is de-facto a case of racial vilification. And I'm certain removing the words "offend" and "insult" won't change this. But removing racial vilification laws entirely just to stop the gagging of holocaust denial is not the solution. In this case common sense should prevail and a legitimate historical debate about holocaust denial should not be considered racial vilification.


Bolt lost his case Gandalf.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by gandalf on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 10:59am

freediver wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 10:50am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:47pm:
18c should remove the words "offend" and "insult", but the reality is it doesn't preclude bigoted speech that isn't based on complete fabrications (as was the case with Bolt). Bill Leak wasn't gagged for his cartoons, despite the fact that we know they "offended" lots of Aboriginal people. I suspect you can pretty much say whatever racist vile rubbish you like as long as its not directly threatening someone. The sole exception to this of course is holocaust denial - which our own first law officer has stated is de-facto a case of racial vilification. And I'm certain removing the words "offend" and "insult" won't change this. But removing racial vilification laws entirely just to stop the gagging of holocaust denial is not the solution. In this case common sense should prevail and a legitimate historical debate about holocaust denial should not be considered racial vilification.


Bolt lost his case Gandalf.


Bolt lost because he told porkies FD - its stated very clearly in the verdict. But yes, if your point is to show that people can't quite "say whatever racist vile rubbish you like as long as its not directly threatening someone" - then yes, I stand corrected. Porkies are an exception.

Porkies are not considered "fair comment", or any of the other exemptions spelled out in 18D. Do you think thats a good thing FD? I do. I have a 'thing' about porkies, as you might have detected.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Dsmithy70 on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 11:08am
How come everyone stops reading the act after 18C

Is 18D written in invisible ink?


Quote:
RACIAL DISCRIMINATION ACT 1975 - SECT 18D

Exemptions
                   Section 18C does not render unlawful anything said or done reasonably and in good faith:

                     (a)  in the performance, exhibition or distribution of an artistic work; or

                     (b)  in the course of any statement, publication, discussion or debate made or held for any genuine academic, artistic or scientific purpose or any other genuine purpose in the public interest; or

                     (c)  in making or publishing:

                              (i)  a fair and accurate report of any event or matter of public interest; or

                             (ii)  a fair comment on any event or matter of public interest if the comment is an expression of a genuine belief held by the person making the comment.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Frank on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 11:13am

Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 18th, 2016 at 12:34pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 18th, 2016 at 10:54am:
What is it about Islam that appeals to you so much? I can't think of any positive aspects to it. You?


Come on, out with it. What do Sore End's church picnics and hideous stool tarts add to our society?

No more stalling, old boy.


Er....the Sydney Opera House was designed by a Lutheran. 


Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by John Smith on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 12:16pm

Frank wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 11:13am:

Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 18th, 2016 at 12:34pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 18th, 2016 at 10:54am:
What is it about Islam that appeals to you so much? I can't think of any positive aspects to it. You?


Come on, out with it. What do Sore End's church picnics and hideous stool tarts add to our society?

No more stalling, old boy.


Er....the Sydney Opera House was designed by a Lutheran. 


and the Auburn Gallipoli Mosque was designed by a musselman.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Karnal on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 12:19pm

Frank wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 11:13am:

Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 18th, 2016 at 12:34pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 18th, 2016 at 10:54am:
What is it about Islam that appeals to you so much? I can't think of any positive aspects to it. You?


Come on, out with it. What do Sore End's church picnics and hideous stool tarts add to our society?

No more stalling, old boy.


Er....the Sydney Opera House was designed by a Lutheran. 


Well, yes...

Apart from that.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Dnarever on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 12:23pm

freediver wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 10:50am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:47pm:
18c should remove the words "offend" and "insult", but the reality is it doesn't preclude bigoted speech that isn't based on complete fabrications (as was the case with Bolt). Bill Leak wasn't gagged for his cartoons, despite the fact that we know they "offended" lots of Aboriginal people. I suspect you can pretty much say whatever racist vile rubbish you like as long as its not directly threatening someone. The sole exception to this of course is holocaust denial - which our own first law officer has stated is de-facto a case of racial vilification. And I'm certain removing the words "offend" and "insult" won't change this. But removing racial vilification laws entirely just to stop the gagging of holocaust denial is not the solution. In this case common sense should prevail and a legitimate historical debate about holocaust denial should not be considered racial vilification.


Bolt lost his case Gandalf.


Yes that is what Gandalf said.

Bolt didn't lose because it was hurtful offending and insulting, he lost because what he said was all untrue.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Frank on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 12:42pm

John Smith wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 12:16pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 11:13am:

Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 18th, 2016 at 12:34pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 18th, 2016 at 10:54am:
What is it about Islam that appeals to you so much? I can't think of any positive aspects to it. You?


Come on, out with it. What do Sore End's church picnics and hideous stool tarts add to our society?

No more stalling, old boy.


Er....the Sydney Opera House was designed by a Lutheran. 


and the Auburn Gallipoli Mosque was designed by a musselman.



Exactly. And the difference is there for all to see.


Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Karnal on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 12:44pm

Frank wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 12:42pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 12:16pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 11:13am:

Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 18th, 2016 at 12:34pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 18th, 2016 at 10:54am:
What is it about Islam that appeals to you so much? I can't think of any positive aspects to it. You?


Come on, out with it. What do Sore End's church picnics and hideous stool tarts add to our society?

No more stalling, old boy.


Er....the Sydney Opera House was designed by a Lutheran. 


and the Auburn Gallipoli Mosque was designed by a musselman.



Exactly. And the difference is there for all to see.


There's the prayer hall on the end of my street, old boy. The Boy Scouts originally designed that.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by John Smith on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 1:33pm

Frank wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 12:42pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 12:16pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 11:13am:

Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 18th, 2016 at 12:34pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 18th, 2016 at 10:54am:
What is it about Islam that appeals to you so much? I can't think of any positive aspects to it. You?


Come on, out with it. What do Sore End's church picnics and hideous stool tarts add to our society?

No more stalling, old boy.


Er....the Sydney Opera House was designed by a Lutheran. 


and the Auburn Gallipoli Mosque was designed by a musselman.



Exactly. And the difference is there for all to see.


i hope they're different. One is a prayer hall, the other for international artisits.

Just imagine your crying if the opera house looked like a mosque. :D :D

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Frank on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 3:26pm

Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 12:44pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 12:42pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 12:16pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 11:13am:

Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 18th, 2016 at 12:34pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 18th, 2016 at 10:54am:
What is it about Islam that appeals to you so much? I can't think of any positive aspects to it. You?


Come on, out with it. What do Sore End's church picnics and hideous stool tarts add to our society?

No more stalling, old boy.


Er....the Sydney Opera House was designed by a Lutheran. 


and the Auburn Gallipoli Mosque was designed by a musselman.



Exactly. And the difference is there for all to see.


There's the prayer hall on the end of my street, old boy. The Boy Scouts originally designed that.


I bet property values plummeted.


Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by freediver on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 4:52pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 10:59am:

freediver wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 10:50am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:47pm:
18c should remove the words "offend" and "insult", but the reality is it doesn't preclude bigoted speech that isn't based on complete fabrications (as was the case with Bolt). Bill Leak wasn't gagged for his cartoons, despite the fact that we know they "offended" lots of Aboriginal people. I suspect you can pretty much say whatever racist vile rubbish you like as long as its not directly threatening someone. The sole exception to this of course is holocaust denial - which our own first law officer has stated is de-facto a case of racial vilification. And I'm certain removing the words "offend" and "insult" won't change this. But removing racial vilification laws entirely just to stop the gagging of holocaust denial is not the solution. In this case common sense should prevail and a legitimate historical debate about holocaust denial should not be considered racial vilification.


Bolt lost his case Gandalf.


Bolt lost because he told porkies FD - its stated very clearly in the verdict. But yes, if your point is to show that people can't quite "say whatever racist vile rubbish you like as long as its not directly threatening someone" - then yes, I stand corrected. Porkies are an exception.

Porkies are not considered "fair comment", or any of the other exemptions spelled out in 18D. Do you think thats a good thing FD? I do. I have a 'thing' about porkies, as you might have detected.


Have you changed your mind again Gandalf? Do you now support Toben's jailing because he was incorrect?

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Dnarever on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 8:17pm

freediver wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 4:52pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 10:59am:

freediver wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 10:50am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 17th, 2016 at 4:47pm:
18c should remove the words "offend" and "insult", but the reality is it doesn't preclude bigoted speech that isn't based on complete fabrications (as was the case with Bolt). Bill Leak wasn't gagged for his cartoons, despite the fact that we know they "offended" lots of Aboriginal people. I suspect you can pretty much say whatever racist vile rubbish you like as long as its not directly threatening someone. The sole exception to this of course is holocaust denial - which our own first law officer has stated is de-facto a case of racial vilification. And I'm certain removing the words "offend" and "insult" won't change this. But removing racial vilification laws entirely just to stop the gagging of holocaust denial is not the solution. In this case common sense should prevail and a legitimate historical debate about holocaust denial should not be considered racial vilification.


Bolt lost his case Gandalf.


Bolt lost because he told porkies FD - its stated very clearly in the verdict. But yes, if your point is to show that people can't quite "say whatever racist vile rubbish you like as long as its not directly threatening someone" - then yes, I stand corrected. Porkies are an exception.

Porkies are not considered "fair comment", or any of the other exemptions spelled out in 18D. Do you think thats a good thing FD? I do. I have a 'thing' about porkies, as you might have detected.


Have you changed your mind again Gandalf? Do you now support Toben's jailing because he was incorrect?


Bolt wasn't jailed and neither would have Toben been until he broke contempt of court laws.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by freediver on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 9:43pm
Great news. I guess we can all go home now. Australians are not jailed for speaking their mind unless they continue to, umm, speak their mind???

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by freediver on Dec 25th, 2016 at 7:11am
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1482607972/0#1

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by The_Barnacle on Dec 25th, 2016 at 10:32am

freediver wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 9:43pm:
Great news. I guess we can all go home now. Australians are not jailed for speaking their mind unless they continue to, umm, speak their mind???


Freediver I think you are choosing to misrepresent what a court order is.

If Toben had have been jailed under 18c there would have been no need for the judge to make a court order because he would have already been in jail.

Court orders are generally made to cover things that arn't already covered by the law.
For example. It is quite legal to not pay your estranged partner a weekly payment. However, if it is part of a court order that you make a weekly payment and you refuse to do so, then you can go to jail for contempt of court.
Clearly in this case it is the breach of the court order that has landed the person in jail because if there was no court order, his actions wouldn't have been a jailable offence.

It is the same with Toben

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by freediver on Dec 25th, 2016 at 6:35pm
Are you saying Toben is free to continue denying the holocaust?

Is it the existence of court orders, or the existence of alimony legislation, that forces a person to pay child support?

Would you go so far as to say that payment of alimony is optional, because it is only the court order rather than the legislation itself that forces someone to pay?

Am I actually choosing to misrepresent what a court order is, or are you just thinking out loud?

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by John Smith on Dec 25th, 2016 at 7:41pm

freediver wrote on Dec 25th, 2016 at 6:35pm:
Am I actually choosing to misrepresent what a court order is, or are you just thinking out loud?



I'm voting the first part.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Dnarever on Dec 25th, 2016 at 7:42pm

freediver wrote on Dec 25th, 2016 at 6:35pm:
Are you saying Toben is free to continue denying the holocaust?

Is it the existence of court orders, or the existence of alimony legislation, that forces a person to pay child support?

Would you go so far as to say that payment of alimony is optional, because it is only the court order rather than the legislation itself that forces someone to pay?

Am I actually choosing to misrepresent what a court order is, or are you just thinking out loud?


Are you saying Toben is free to continue denying the holocaust?


He was found guilty of producing material which qualified as racially vilify Jewish people.

He can deny the holocaust all he likes as long as he does so without racially vilifying Jewish people.


Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Karnal on Dec 25th, 2016 at 9:22pm

freediver wrote on Dec 23rd, 2016 at 9:43pm:
Great news. I guess we can all go home now. Australians are not jailed for speaking their mind unless they continue to, umm, speak their mind???


Strange. You're now waging a full propaganda campaign against something you've been disagreeing with G over for years.

Of course, I blame Islam, but that's just me.

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by freediver on Dec 26th, 2016 at 8:58am

Dnarever wrote on Dec 25th, 2016 at 7:42pm:

freediver wrote on Dec 25th, 2016 at 6:35pm:
Are you saying Toben is free to continue denying the holocaust?

Is it the existence of court orders, or the existence of alimony legislation, that forces a person to pay child support?

Would you go so far as to say that payment of alimony is optional, because it is only the court order rather than the legislation itself that forces someone to pay?

Am I actually choosing to misrepresent what a court order is, or are you just thinking out loud?


Are you saying Toben is free to continue denying the holocaust?


He was found guilty of producing material which qualified as racially vilify Jewish people.

He can deny the holocaust all he likes as long as he does so without racially vilifying Jewish people.


What if Jewish people happen to be part of his explanation for how we came to believe the holocaust happened? Is he allowed to talk about that, or does he have to leave it out in case they feel vilified?

Title: Re: 18 c lies and more lies.
Post by Karnal on Dec 26th, 2016 at 11:54am
FD's finally come around, G.

Australian Politics Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5.2!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2022. All Rights Reserved.