The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Understanding free speech: going beyond the 18c debate > Comments

Understanding free speech: going beyond the 18c debate : Comments

By James English, published 11/8/2014

In the same way, a person should not be allowed to express an opinion that is discriminatory and does not make a positive contribution to public discourse.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All
Abbott's only option is to send all "Freedom of Speech" Holocaust deniers to Curtin Detention Centre. There these hot white woman can boogy with our brown brothers http://youtu.be/UQ38b6Qztgs .
Posted by plantagenet, Monday, 11 August 2014 11:45:09 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yeah, but...
Toben wins and Chris Berg loses if that's an unvarnished account of proceedings, I've no idea what makes Fred Toben tick but I know why people like Chris Berg support the Holocaust narrative.
18c was devised to support the Holocaust narrative and insulate the Zionist lobby from outside criticism and preserve the dictatorship of Zionist identity politics over Jewish population and emphasise this, as Tony Judt phrased it "cultural debt" owed to the Jews in light of WW2.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTc6LBtWEg0
The reason 18c was written in such a way is to ensure that the Holocaust narrative cannot be tried in court, the Brandis proposal would have allowed people like Toben to cross examine Holocaust proponents, that would have been a disaster because it puts the proponents in a position where they either have to perjure themselves or concede.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Monday, 11 August 2014 5:17:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pete, there are no "hot" female "Holocaust deniers" they're all fat old poofs who'd jump at the chance to "boogie with the brown brothers"...haven't the refugees suffered enough already though?
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Monday, 11 August 2014 5:20:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well Jay

As Little Boy Mengele would say - "Vee can only improve the gene pool Fritzy lad."

The cast of Curtin Detention Centre are presently on tour, not in Nauru, but at a theater near you - with Battalions of hot babes in:

Springtime With Hitler and Germany

http://youtu.be/kHmYIo7bcUw

Enjoy

Pete
Posted by plantagenet, Monday, 11 August 2014 5:54:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Two can play at that game!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZP5RsaRg6k
Although I wish I knew what game we were playing..
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Monday, 11 August 2014 6:20:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Right Jay

That was below the belt of totally misunderstood Adolf suggesting he started WWII because he didn't get ANY from fair Eva.

Three can play at that game in ways of bad taste and in worse odor - i.e. Hitler's special selection method http://youtu.be/sqemO2yXeD0 . Like any Fascist newsreel it is unfortunately demeaning to women.

Suffer mate suffer :)

Pete
Posted by plantagenet, Monday, 11 August 2014 8:40:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The proposal to repeal 18C caused a lot of debate in our household! As it did in Australia. And how good was that.

Intuitively it appears to be a good thing to have, freedom to say whatever one wants.

And contrary to what Jay of M thinks, the debate is not about the Holocaust, but what that bit of history did teach us, the preceding years beforehand. How what was previously unacceptable to say became less and less shocking until it became acceptable and indeed admirable. It did not take long to demonize an entire group of people within the community and an otherwise decent people supported unspeakable things to happen to other human beings.
Posted by yvonne, Monday, 11 August 2014 8:53:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Conflating race and ideology is a device to bar an ideology from criticism, rejection, ridicule by pretending that what is under discussion is genetic, not ideological, inheritance. There is nothing in 18C that does this, though a lot of PC discourse attempts frequently to do so. Challenging and rejecting notions of entitlement to Palestinian territory for an exclusive “homeland for Jews” is not racist Jew-hatred. Rejecting Moslem coercion against apostasy or impiety or compulsion of women wear body-bags, or strafing ISIS cut-throats, is not racism against brown people. The PC wannabe thought police could not sustain a case under 18C as it is written (even without 18D). However 18C does protect people from discrimination and insult on the basis of their genetic inheritance or their chosen life arrangements which do not impact on the rights of others, and should definitely remain in place
Posted by EmperorJulian, Monday, 11 August 2014 9:10:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yvonne.
Err..nope I'm pretty sure Aktion Reinhard took place in top secret camps out in Polish "Bandit country" as Odilo Globocnic called it.
The program was so secret that there's no evidence Hitler even knew about it much less the German people, Globocnic had to fund the entire operation out of the proceeds of the liquidation of Jewish assets so that the Reich bean counters weren't sticking their noses where they didn't belong.
See Yvonne I'm not a "Holocaust Denier", I'm an admirer of Fascism, when Himmler publicly praised the SS on having the strength to retain their humanity in spite of being surrounded by hundreds of corpses I believe him.
It's my contention however that the Zionists and the Stalinists lied about the Holocaust and the version of WW2 they promote has been utterly discredited, the National Socialist accounts of the "liquidation" of the Jews are rock solid as far as anyone can tell.
At any rate, we'll see how much "new" information appears as the relationship between Russia and the West deteriorates, the Soviets took trainloads of documents away from Germany after the war and they're all still there in the Kremlin archives, the Russian FSB would know where the bodies are buried, both figuratively and literally.
Some Jewish people went into the Reich labour camp systems and were never seen again, others survived to tell stories about putting on plays and concerts and playing football matches on their days off, it's all well documented.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Monday, 11 August 2014 9:32:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
James English's article is a perfect example of a spin piece written by an intelligent ideologue who is not thinking smart. It is a longwinded and convoluted defence of the principle that freedom of speech is a good thing, provided that people do not say anything that James opposes, and speak against his state endorsed social ideology.

Even when that ideology is self evidently failing.

James claims without proof that most Australians are in favour of laws preventing racial vilification. But exactly what is "racial vilification," and why is it that some ethnic and demographic groups are always protected from any criticism (homosexuals and Muslims) while others (Israelis, Jews, White Australians, and Americans) are not?

The Bolt case was a perfect example of why these laws need to be reformed. In a time of economic recession with so many people accessing social security, that the Australian Federal government is finding it difficult to find the money to give to social welfare recipients, it is imperative to determine just who, and who is not, eligible for assistance. This is a serious social issue that must be discussed.

But the Bolt case proved that people who have a special interest in maintaining the flow of taxpayer gold into their pockets can use 18C as a weapon to shut their up their critics and shut down public scrutiny. This is completely unacceptable in a democratic and free society where all issues relating to social policy must and should be discussed.

James English is a well meaning person of zeal who thinks that everybody can live together in multicultural splendour provided that we all apply the three monkey approach to all of the problems that are now manifesting themselves. There were a lot of Commissars in the Soviet Union who thought exactly the same way as James over any criticism of the workers paradise. We in the free world used to laugh at the Sovs for that, now James wants us to emulate them.

Like socialism, there is something fundamentally wrong with multiculturalism if it needs to shut up it's critics through legal sanction.
Posted by LEGO, Tuesday, 12 August 2014 4:51:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There seems to be a sort of hierarchy of 'offense' from mild disagreement to outright murder, coloured by the factor of 'intent':

* complete agreement

* mild disagreement

* strong disagreement

* offense

* insult

* ridicule

* humiliation

* vilification

* incitement to violence

* actual violence

* etc.

+ intent.

I suppose each of us has our cut-off point - mine would be somewhere between 'insult with intent' or 'unintentional ridicule', and 'ridicule with intent' or 'humiliate'. In short form between 'insult' and 'ridicule'.

I've got Indigenous kids, and I suspect that they have copped some ridicule and humiliation back in their secondary school days which has stayed with them. Easy, gutless comments deliberately intended to ridicule or humiliate on racist grounds, should be - somehow - punished severely. Perhaps expulsion. Or a year in a reformatory.

But I'm not so sure about ridicule on personal grounds: accusing someone, in comfortable circumstances, of grabbing benefits tacitly designed for others raised and/or existing in difficult circumstances, for example.

It's interesting that Bolt was pinged, not strictly for insulting or ridiculing, but for supposedly getting a few minor facts wrong about a handful of Johnnie-come-latelies, as, I suspect, many in the Indigenous community would have seen them.

But I suppose we can't go there :)

Joe
www.firstsources.info
Posted by Loudmouth, Tuesday, 12 August 2014 9:39:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bolt was pinged because he often exposes the complete hypocrisy of the 'progressives' whether it be the gw fantasy, the aboriginal industry, Islam or the atrocious abc bias. Speaking the truth always attracts the ire of the left.
Posted by runner, Tuesday, 12 August 2014 10:29:32 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Gerard Henderson on Sunday said the actual judgement against Bolt was what the Judge said was "between the lines". Apparently this judge was actually a mind reader and knew what Bolt meant not what he wrote.
This is fascinating, the Fascists aided and abetted by people like this author are now reading our minds and will decide how to punish people who they think do not agree with them.
Judges in the UK are already trying to take over the law and now it is happening here in Australia.
Of course all we need is for us to urge politicians to curb the judges obscene benefits and show them who actually run things.
Posted by JBowyer, Tuesday, 12 August 2014 10:56:09 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
JOM, as you are an admirer of fascism, I doubt we'd have much to discuss at anytime. Totalitarian ideologies, both on the right and left are belief systems that require complete obedience and conformity. Followers are as zealous in promoting their rules, while being totally deaf to what anybody else may have to say to the contrary as is any new born evangelical Christian or cult follower.

They are even more tedious than are reformed smokers and health nuts.
Posted by yvonne, Tuesday, 12 August 2014 2:05:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy