Palestinian woman Randa Abdel Fattah has been controversially disinvited or "cancelled" from an Adelaide Writers festival in the last few days, with the event now formally cancelled for 2026.

Nearly all of the other writers to present had pulled out of the event, citing opposition to her cancellation and limiting freedom of speech.

Some people out there are furious calling for formal investigations re the cancellation and outside political interference.

Randa Abdel Fattah though has been found to have tried to "cancel" a pro-Israeli author back in 2024, which comes across a double standard.

http://thenightly.com.au/australia/randa-abdel-fattah-row-literal-irony-of-woke-writers-block-as-authors-board-members-quit-adelaide-festival-c-21282572

We have also seen people like Deborah Conway for example have her events targeted by Palestinian activists due to her comments on Israel.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-05-28/deborah-conway-performance-interrupted-pro-palestinian-protest/103900264

I'm all for free speech. I am also for responsibility. I am though opposed to double standards, people picking and choosing what is free speech and who can talk and who cannot talk at something like a writers festival based on their own personal views.

Tough titty. This nasty person has a history of hate speech against Jews. She also signed a letter with other nasty leftists to block an Israeli writer from the same Writers' Hate Fest last year.

All the freaks boycotted the freak show. Most of the board have resigned. And best of all, the thing has been cancelled. Hopefully Adelaide will never again be plagued by "writers" hardly anyone has heard of. We've just had a massacre of Jews, and this bint even uses the bigoted, racist, genocidal phrase 'from the river to the sea', one of the filthy chants that should earn its users jail-time, followed by deportation for non-citizens afterwards.

I wonder if high profile Jewish lawyers Mark and Jeremy Liebler (President of Zionist Federation of Australia) make threats of lawfare against anyone even remotely critical of Israel, in this case the board of the Adelaide writers festival?

A similar situation seemed to occur at the Bendigo writers festival in August.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bendigo_Writers_Festival_boycott

Seems these people are happy for there to be no festival at all. If the stories aren't Pro Israel (and silence all others as Anti-Semitic - the Anti-Zionist line taken in Bendigo) telling us all things like how the IDF is the most moral army in the world and how horrible everyone and everything else is, which is never their fault and an offense to even suggest, then they prefer no festival.

And then they wonder why people have no love or respect for them.

I bet if I made two big signs.
One saying 'Jews are shite' and the other saying 'Aussies are shite'
And went and took turns holding up those signs for passing motorists
I bet that saying 'Aussies are shite' would be perfectly acceptable.
But that I'd be carted off by the cops for other one in about 15 minutes.

Antisemitism appears to eat away the brains of people suffering from the condition.

Board members quit Adelaide Festival as dumped writer calls in lawyer
http://www.smh.com.au/national/palestinian-australian-writer-calls-in-lawyer-as-adelaide-festival-fallout-grows-20260111-p5nt5q.html

>>The Adelaide Festival board is now made up of Tracey Whiting, Leesa Chesser, Mary Couros, Brenton Cox and Jennifer Fuller (government observer). Chesser, a former South Australian state MP was a co-convener of the Parliamentary Friends of Israel group, established in 2014.

Sydney-based Abdel-Fattah had been scheduled to speak about her new novel, Discipline, which examines ideas of truth and censorship. In recent years, she has come under fire for past social media posts which said Zionists had “no claim to cultural safety” and that institutions that considered “fragile feelings of Zionists” were “abhorrent”.

She has also been criticised for use of an image of a parachutist under the Palestinian flag which she made her Facebook profile photo the day after the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, 2023.

Adelaide Writers’ Week sits under the banner of the Adelaide Festival.

Louise Adler, who has helmed the writers’ week to great acclaim for the past three years, has not spoken publicly since the decision.

Jeremy Leibler, president of the Zionist Federation of Australia, said the decision to withdraw Abdel-Fattah’s invitation was correct.

“It is beyond comprehension how they extended the invitation in the first place to someone who has called for Zionists ... to have no cultural safety in this country,” he said. “Someone who days after the worst terrorist attack on Jewish civilians [October 7] that included the rape, murder and kidnapping of civilians, celebrated it as resistance.”<<

I'm not sure if an equal tit-for-tat applies here
Each side trying to cancel the other.

If we were to recognise international law, then we have to accept the Palestinians are under occupation and blockade and have a genuine right to fight their oppressors and want a better life for themselves.

October 7 did also include an attack on an Israeli military base.
I don't see why Palestinians can't talk about October 7 in the context of and aspirations for freedom.

Some part of me thinks 'Yes if these people are kept in a concentration camp for decades and they conduct a jailbreak and go on a rampage against their oppressors' the writers amongst these people get to write a book, and if Israeli's or Zionists disagree they should state their borders and come into compliance with international law, stop subjagating these people and stop trying to silence anyone that speaks out or opposes it.

They only want to silence everyone, so that they can keep doing the thing they were doing, 'genocide' and 'ethnic cleansing' / 'land theft' 'rape' 'torture' 'murder' 'assassinations' 'wilful starvation and denial of basic needs' 'killing journalists and first responders' ...blowing up not just doctors, but entire hospitals - all of 36 of them and denying kids anesthetic for amputations.

Basically just complete terror on a nationwide level.

THE STUFF THAT MAY VERY WELL HAVE LEAD TO BONDI

Why should a Palestinian (Now Australian?) be prevented from saying what they think or venting their anger and frustration at Israel?

Like we're not aussie, and this woman can't have a few drinks as Aussie women sometimes like to do (not that I'm saying she does)
And speak her mind, and lash out a bit, get angry and emotional
Call Israel murderous and shite and wish they didn't exist.
It's not really unreasonable for her to feel that way you know.

We're becoming pretty pathetic if we carry on telling her she has no right to publicly speak her mind or vent her frustration or anger.

Like really pathetic.

Stupid Jewish censorship.
Let the woman speak.

Something in South Australia more important than the thankfully cancelled crackpot Leftist Writers’ Week is comments by SA Senator Alex Antic in relation to the Palestinian hate speech and its support from Marxist writers that brought it down.

Antic will oppose the Bill that has seen Parliament recalled early to vote on and the ‘captain's pick’ Royal Commission no matter what his party (Liberal) does.

He rightly says we have enough laws now to deal with antisemitism and hate speech.

Antic questions how the “very very significant piece of legislation” could be “rattled straight off the cuff”. (When the political class has done bugger all over the two years they have been warned by ASIO of what we were heading towards).

He claims that it is an extraordinary omnibus Bill that the government is expecting to have passed at one go.

And “we have enough laws on the books in this country as it is”, he says.

They don't enforce these laws now! Why would they enforce new ones?

Even Ley is sceptical of a single bill that covers “multiple complex and UNRELATED policy areas”.

Barnaby Joyce also gets a vote free of the Nationals as he now is. He believes the combining of hate speech laws (on top of the unused ones we already have) with gun laws is “mischievous”.

Vote for one part of the Bill means voting for the lot, and really upsetting farmers and shooters who have done nothing wrong: while the real problem, Islamism, is getting scant attention.

PM Thickanese admits that since the draconian Howard gun laws the number of guns in Australia has increased, but wants to do it again! He even repeated his pathetic Bondi terrorists “had hatred in their minds, but guns in their hands” mantra.

So, reducing the number of guns farmer Joe or shooting club members can have will put a stop to those pesky Islamic terrorists! What horseshit

ttbn,

I don't think Deborah Conway wants her events constantly interrupted because of her views on Israel. Personally, I don't she should have to face that type of activity and in real terms it is achieving nothing at the end of the day.

I don't see why she should have to put up with people trying to "cancel" her out in the name of free speech. In principle she should be left alone, except maybe in terms of commenting and discussion on issues and matters where there should be robust debate.

Randa Abdul-Fattah has though openly come out and said she would not have any discussion or talk with Deborah Conway, so in that context she is very selective.

I think those that want to silence others and allow others a free space on the Israel/Gaza matter need to understand it's not going away and they will need to learn to get on, even if they have differing views on the conflict overseas.

Censorship is always wrong. Never right.

Fattah is a truly despicable character. Let her talk so the whole world can see it.

We need insult-free & hate incitement-free speech !
Parliamentarians should also be charged when they blatantly lie or bluntly refuse to answer questions. Beating around the bush should result in suspension with no pay !
Reporters caught lying & misquoting should be reprimanded !

"Fattah is a truly despicable character. Let her talk so the whole world can see it."

If people are speaking from the heart, not specifically setting out to cause conflict, even if they are upset, frustrated or angry about a particular event, so long as what they are saying really is an extension of their true beliefs, and they're not openly calling for violence, I think the speech should be permitted.

Peak Jewish group urges Labor to 'get rid' of hate exemption for religious texts
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-01-14/jewish-groups-warns-against-religious-text-defence/106228086

>>The head of Australia's peak Jewish body has urged Labor to "get rid of" a defence to its new offence of inciting racial hatred that would exempt those quoting directly from religious texts during teaching or religious discussion.

Peter Wertheim, chief executive of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, has told a parliamentary inquiry into the draft laws that the carve-out provides a loophole for preachers seeking to espouse hate.<<

Is this going to apply to all religions?
Including theirs?

“Nobody should express any sympathy for, let alone solidarity with, the person who caused the controversy (Adelaide's Writers Week), nor the luvvies who flounced out after (the Palestinian antisemitic activist”). The real issue is this. If you take the taxpayers' coin for your love-in, the government of the day which approves the funding has a right to say who comes to the party”. ( Anon)

In the meantime, the Trump administration has issued a “stark warning” to the Albanese government over its new hate speech legislation.

(People who have seen it have declared it to be a dog's breakfast that doesn't mention Islamic extremism, which is the root cause of the problem. Worse than the UK, which sees 30 people (not Islamists) arrested every day for expressing their opinions).

And there is an EXEMPTION from speaking hatefully if the sources are from religious texts.

No prizes for guessing who those people would be!

And so, the U.S says that the laws would be “deeply perverse” and create a “double standard”.

And before people huff and puff about the U.S not sticking its nose into our affairs, they should think about Venezuela.

Albanese is now a threat to the safety and well-being of Australians. Not only the scale of Maduro - yet - but certainly to a Marxist level never before known in democratic Australia.

The U.S Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy argues that the Albanese legislation provides a “safe harbour” for jihadist extremism, but “imprisons you for calling to deport jihadist extremists”.

She does say, “Let's hope this is not what Australia intends”; but Albanese's behaviour suggests it is what is intended.

She says that the trouble with hate speech laws is that they are administered by people who “coddle actual violent zealots”.

Well known say-it-the-way-he-sees- it Congressman, Jim Jordan, has mentioned to our Censor-in-chief the idea of Australia's “global censorship regime” in a another sense, adding to the growing suspicion here and in our main allied country that the Albanese regime intends to crush freedom of speech. Too much time spent with the CPA instead of like-minded Western allies.

The Bill ‘Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism Bill’ to be debated next Monday should be chucked out, and the real causes of threats to Australia's safety and security addressed openly.

The U.S is not only having to police dictatorial, terror-ridden countries: it is also having to speak for the people in Western countries whose own governments seek to enslave them.

“Nobody should express any sympathy for, let alone solidarity with, the person who caused the controversy.

The people who caused the controversy is high profile Jews and their lobby groups.
High profile Jewish lawyers Mark and his son Jeremy Liebler, who are also the chairman of AIJAC and President of the Zionist Federation of Australia, imposing a view that criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic and I'm assuming using threats of lawfare to shut down the free speech of Australians.

AI Overview
The statement "Anti-Zionism is Antisemitism" is a prominent position advocated by figures such as Jeremy Leibler, the President of the Zionist Federation of Australia (ZFA), and his father, Mark Leibler, a senior partner at law firm Arnold Bloch Leibler and chairman of the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC). They argue that anti-Zionism is a modern form of antisemitism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bendigo_Writers_Festival_boycott
The Bendigo Writers Festival boycott occurred in August 2025 over a code of conduct adopted by the festival held in Bendigo, Australia, and operated by the City of Greater Bendigo. The code mandated that speakers at the Bendigo Writers Festival avoid divisive topics and that those speaking at events hosted by La Trobe University comply with the university's anti-racism plan, which had adopted a broad definition of antisemitism construed to include anti-Zionist criticism of Israel.

Are we really going to destroy our own country ourselves because a Palestinian Australian levels a bit of truth-venom at a nation murdering her relatives?

The neo-Nazis have announced that they will disband if Albanese's hate speech laws get through. They don't want to go to jail for their opinions, any more than anyone else does.

This could be interesting, as Albanese would no long be able to avoid talking about the Islamic threat in Australia by yapping about Nazis.

ttbn,

I'm curious as to why you treat discussion of Islamist extremism as serious and necessary, but then dismiss any discussion about neo-Nazis as mere "yabbering".

Both are documented, domestic extremist movements flagged by ASIO.

If the principle is addressing real threats, then dismissing one category while inflating another looks less like realism and more like ideological selectivity.

No, no - don't reply. It would be more revealing if we just left that double standard to sit there and go unanswered.

Another thing, ttbn.

I had a quick skim of the bill, but can't see which provision(s) would render it a crime to hold certain beliefs - let alone a crime punishable by imprisonment.

Could you point me to them?

http://www.ag.gov.au/crime/publications/explanatory-memorandum-combatting-antisemitism-hate-and-extremism-bill-2026

Why do people think this cancellation is not a good thing ?

"you treat discussion of Islamist extremism as serious and necessary, but then dismiss any discussion about neo-Nazis as mere "yabbering"."

Good question. Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that Islamists have been involved in all sorts of murderous attacks here and overseas culminating in the execution of 15 innocents, while neo-Nazi murderous attacks are all merely in the fantasies of the various left leaning authorities.

When the neo-Nazis starting shooting up people at religious festivals, perhaps we can start talking about the threats being equal.

That doesn't really answer the question, mhaze.

Far-right and neo-Nazi violence isn't hypothetical or confined to "left-wing fantasies". It's already produced mass-casualty attacks in Western democracies, including attacks on religious gatherings.

Threat assessment isn't a body-count competition either, and governments don't wait for movements to reach ISIS-scale lethality before taking them seriously. If we only talk about risks after people are killed, prevention becomes impossible by definition.

Treating discussion on one form of extremism as inherently serious and necessary while dismissing another as "yabbering" isn't realism. It's selective perception.

Why can't I just stand up for what I believe in?

I DON'T SUPPORT SANCTIONS OR OVERTHROWS

You all think I'm Anti-Semetic, where do you think this valid belief above took me?

I never used to be so critical of Israel, but the more I dug, ad the more the more things I looked at, the more reason I had for criticism.

Think about the egg on my face when I cane to understand that all this conflict that caused the Islamic immigration, was in support of Israeli interests?

People screaming about Bondi, yet acting like Israels murder of hundreds of thousands of innocent women and kids has absolutely zero to do with anything and a completely unrelated issue?
Have you all gone made with anti-semitism brainwashing?

Even now the U.S. presidency was arguably PURCHASED by Miriam Adelson who cares more about Israel than America, and Trumps putting out MIGA tweets, while supporting another regime change where thousands of people are getting killed, lets cheer on an insurrection January 6 style, attack and occupy their institutions!.

But no, Mossad has nothing to do with Iran, and Bondi has nothing to do with Gaza
- and we're all living in a fantasy world.

So how long till this strike on Iran?
Isn't it about due?

Queensland man to be charged with murder after carer’s body found
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/queensland/queensland-man-to-be-charged-with-murder-after-carer-s-body-found-20260114-p5nu3l.html

>>A warrant for a Queensland man has been issued over the alleged murder of his carer at a home in Buccan, south of Brisbane, earlier this week.
Brisbane artist Velvet Pesu, 46, was found dead at Wael Abdallah Saleem Alfar’s home on Waterford Tamborine Road in Buccan, Logan, about 2.30am on Monday.<<

Its interesting how the usual suspects, ttbn and the Trumpster, support the Neo-Nazis, but condemn those on the left who support free speech. In 1938 that arch conservative Pig Iron Bob, the founder of the Liberal Party, returned from Germany singing the praises of Nazi leader Adolf Hitler. I believe Pig Iron had visions of one day leading a Nazi style party in Australia, seeing himself as the future Fuhrer Of Australia.

Hi Paul,
Yes it's kind of funny isn't it.
The left used to be the cancel culture mob.
Now the right are screaming 'Don't let those Palestinians have a say! Shut all those people criticising Israel up!
Meanwhile Jewish people scream about hate, while Jews kill Muslims en masse and expect there to be no blowback and Christians just stand there stupified thinking 'Must support Israel'.

A few years ago the left looked batshite crazy, now everything has turned on it's head and they're the ones looking like they don't know whether they're Arthur or Martha.

I think I'm more of a policy person than a party person.
I just WILL NOT support sanctions and overthrows.

Does any one else feel like I do?
That the while entire world is just a total load of bullcrap.
I know not many people see the world as I do.

I could show you all just one thing that if they looked into it would prove how full of it the world really is.

Jeffrey Sachs: “Our mainstream media are so lame or so bought that they report that the Iranian government has lost control of the economy without saying that the United States has CRUSHED the Iranian economy..”

They'd rather gobble up the news-slop they're spoonfed.

t makes me sad you know, I wonder how Australians would react if we we're the subject of sanctions and regime change.

Half the country would be screaming appeasement and to remove our own elected leaders, and another half of the country would be screaming about soverignty and that the U.S. is the enemy.

Sanctions work, it uses economic coercion to divide the whole nation and make conditions ripe for revolution.

And guaranteed, that while the sanctions crash and devalue the currency other rich bastards are shorting the currency and making money off the mess they caused or are in on.
More money, to pay for more insurrection.

Social media can be easily manipulated.
Pay an army of people from a less developed country $10 a day and they'll post whatever propaganda is required.

The foreign provocateurs in Iran were there waiting to act since the 12 day war, but the strikes on the Iranian leadership failed, so they held them back, Trumps either a party to all of it, or either so dumb he has no idea what he'd doing.

What do you think happened when Trump said 'If there are more killings by the Iranian regime, we will have to act'?
Israeli Mossad provocatuers started killing other protesters.

http://x.com/mehranha/status/2010849930990981622
If you think this is a “domestic matter” and no foreign power should intervene, remember this: in just days, hundreds of protesters have been shot, many in the head, some from behind, simply for chanting anti-regime slogans.

* Emphasis: People being shot in the back of the head, from close range.

Paul 1405 makes ridiculous and ignorant statements to get the attention he craves - and he is getting less attention as more posters ignore him for the idiot he is - but to say that I and mhaze support Nazis is an outrageous, slanderous lie, which would have have him in court if I could identify him as a real person.

But, like his beloved Greens, he has slipped into irrelevance, and that is welcome and satisfying on its own.

Even this post will make him puff out his little chest, because to him and the relatively few sadsacks like like him, any attention is better than none.

As for you, Armchair Critic and your comment on the 'left"; the Leftiest of the left, the Greens, are also against Albanese's rushed and ridiculous Bill.

The Albanese government alone thinks it is a good idea. Everyone else is against it.

Apart from Palestinians having no standing in Australia, and Australia having no skin at all in foreign conflicts, nobody is “screaming” that Palestinians should have no say. Nor do they want critics of Israel ‘shutup’.

People are entitled to criticise Israel. They are not entitled to preach hate against Israel or Jews. They are not entitled to misuse language and the meanings of words to lie about Israel and Jews.

Free speech, the right to hold an opinion, has nothing to do with hate speech. And, hate speech is what the Albanese government has tolerated, and will continue to tolerate if their vile Bill is passed.

Even the Greens see that.

On hate speech/free speech/opinion and what has to be recognised as the root-of-all-evil in the 21st. Century, radical Islam (not mentioned in the Albanese Bill) this piece of information is noteworthy:

The Islamic Arab Emirates has now removed UK universities from its list of state-funded study destinations, citing concerns that students are being radicalised on British campuses.

The UAE does not want their kids to be radicalised on campus.

Let that sink in. A Middle Eastern government has decided British universities are too extreme for its citizens.

This sort of knocks in the head some of the extreme views on Islam and Muslim people in general, and reminds us of the fact that Middle Eastern Muslim countries do not want radical Islam either. And they won't take in Muslims from Gaza. Only pathetic, suicidal Australia does that.

Just had a reminder that the Albanese hate Bill doesn't require a complaint about nasty words from individuals: the government will make the decision! If that's not another step in the direction of totalitarianism, what is?

The voice, mad bill, antisemitism, renewable energy con, recognising Palestine as a state, economic incompetence, and now this authoritarian garbage. Albo ever over delivers when it comes to being revolting.

Hi ttbh,
"Apart from Palestinians having no standing in Australia, and Australia having no skin at all in foreign conflicts, nobody is “screaming” that Palestinians should have no say. Nor do they want critics of Israel ‘shutup’.

People are entitled to criticise Israel. They are not entitled to preach hate against Israel or Jews. They are not entitled to misuse language and the meanings of words to lie about Israel and Jews."

It's becoming a really fine line.

They create both vagueness around the laws.
What is and what isn't permissible with topics surrounding Jews and Israel.
What is and what is not fair and reasonable criticism
And I have to be thinking about whether or not the things I say might offend someone.
Instead of thinking about whether or not what I want to say holds merit.

And then they throw in a healthy dose of fear
Having cops kick your door in and haul you off before a magistrate for saying something online that offended someone.
And then people self-censor on their own,
And then without any pushback they keep shift the goalposts.

Free speech...
If you all let them come after me for the things I say..
Eventually they will come after all of you for the things you say as well.

It's not like any of us have any choice anyway.
Soon everything will be controlled and monitored by AI.

https://youtu.be/8IYcqyO4hOA?si=WbZBs3r3gZS_Jyjo

ttbn,

So now Albanese is a right-winger? That's quite the own-goal you've linked us to there.

Whoops!

Pauline Hanson announced today that Albanese's badly flawed hate Bill is dead in the water. Let's hope she is right, as pretty much everything else she has said has turned out to be right.

“Albanese has run out of friends”, she says. His time in office is defined by the Bondi atrocity. He has allowed antisemitism to go unchallenged, and encouraged it by recognising (non-existent) Palestine.

The awful Bill represents:

. Albanese's incompetence
. It is unnecessary
. It is dangerous
. It is divisive (Division is Albanese's brand)
. It is ineffective

As for the uninformed crack on the video of Albanese dancing around in a Nazi uniform, I'm not saying he is Nazi (ask the person responsible for the clip if he does suggest that) and the National Socialists are not, were never, "right wing". Only people who don't read very much, and who rely on AI, believe that they Nazis are right wing. The neo variety are just a bunch of ratbags, too few to do any real harm, compared with the Left and their Islamic mates, who were made for each other.

ttbn,

The "National socialists therefore left wing" line is a basic category error. The Nazi's weren't anymore left-wing than the DPKR is democratic. Political ideology isn't determined by what movements call themselves. It's determined by what they believe and do.

By every serious criterion, Nazism was far-right: ultranationalist, racially hierarchical, anti-egalitarian, anti-Marxist, anti-democratic, and violently hostile to the left.

The Nazis didn’t just disagree with the left, the left were the first on their hit list.

Socialist and communist parties were banned almost immediately, trade unions were smashed, left-wing politicians and organisers were jailed or killed, and Marxism was treated as a mortal enemy of the state. Private industry remained in place, but under strict authoritarian control in service of nationalist goals - which is the opposite of socialist economics.

This isn't controversial among historians. The idea that Nazism was "left wing" survives almost entirely in modern polemic, not scholarship.

And neo-Nazis today don't hide where they sit either. They oppose egalitarianism, multiculturalism, feminism, and the left itself. Calling them "left wing" doesn't clarify anything - it just inverts reality and makes you look self-conscious about what past right-wing dictatorships mean for modern conservatives (hint: nothing).

So yes, it's an own-goal.

JD

Your robotic writing style reeks of Artificial Intelligence and leftist dogma. Your non-stop badgering of posters whose opinions/beliefs you dislike suggests you are a manic obsessive.

You are 100% negative. You have never agreed with anyone. You have never contributed a topic. You just like disagreeing with everyone.

Your phrase “basic category error” is straight out of wankerland: an attempt to make yourself seem smarter than everyone else. Have you been reading ‘W.nkernomics A Deep-Dive Into Workplace Bullsh.ttery’, by James Schoeffel and Charles Firth?

I don't know what DPKR stands for; but the use of acronyms is another trick used by bullsh.t artists trying to look smarter than they are.

The first people taken out by the Nazis were the Junkers. Hardly left wing.

There are left wing historians and right wing historians who tell different stories, and you would of course have gone with the ones that suit your bent. Past and present historians can not necessarily be trusted. They are human beings like the rest of us, and they have their own beliefs. You never provide references to back your opinions; and opinions are all you are left with without proof. Even if you provided references, which you never do, I could match them with others that provide the exact opposite information.

As for what you believe Nazis “oppose”: egalitarianism, multiculturalism, feminism, and the left itself”, well, I oppose (or rather don't believe in them) myself, and I am not a Nazi.

You've clearly never used AI then, ttbn.

//Your robotic writing style reeks of Artificial Intelligence and leftist dogma.//

You've clearly never used AI then, ttbn. You once pointed out it was recommending glue as a pizza topping, so how would it suddenly be producing coherent replies here?

I think you're improvising here.

You haven't defended the claim that Nazism was left wing. You've switched to personal abuse and then to "all historians are biased so nothing can be known". That's not rebuttal, it's abdication.

The Junkers weren't some early left-wing purge. They were conservative Prussian landowners and were mostly accommodated by the regime. The people who were smashed first, and systematically, were socialists, communists and trade unions. That isn't a matter of interpretation or "leftist historians", it's just what happened.

Saying "I oppose egalitarianism, multiculturalism, feminism and the left, but I'm not a Nazi" doesn't help your case, either. Nobody said holding those views automatically makes someone a Nazi. The point is just that this is the same patch of political ground Nazism came out of, which is why calling it left wing doesn't work.

You're free to dislike my tone, my words, or my disagreements. But name-calling doesn't change what Nazism was, who it targeted first, or where it sits on the political spectrum.

By the way, ttbn.

DPKR stands for Democratic People's Republic of Korea. It's North Korea.

There was no trick or attempt to look smarter there - everyone knows that.

Even you, I suspect.

Presumptuous as well irritating. I use AI quite often. It's the first thing that pops up on Google. And I have and use the Gemini app. Not that there's much point in telling you that. You are so “clear” on everything. You must be a delight to live with: if you have managed to get someone to live with you.

Can you show me where I said that AI recommended glue as a pizza topping? I would be surprised if I ever uttered the ‘pizza’, horrible greasy things that they are.

No. I didn't abuse historians as your substitution of my words suggests. I don't do abuse, except when I have my stomach turned enough by you to bother. And you do so like the victimhood role.

Your comment on the Junkers reinforces your reputation as an ignoramus. As does your idea that going after unions makes anyone a Nazi.

What is my “case” that isn't helped?

Finally, thank you so much for allowing me the freedom to dislike you and the rubbish you preach. You attract dislike like a turd attracts blowflies.

Well, I'd just like to say that my horrible rants are entirely my own.
I haven't even properly looked into AI, as in ChatGPT or anything.
I've made a few pictures with Grok for my own curiosity and amusement maybe 2 or 3 times.
Beyond that if I ask google a question and get an AI result, I share that info as an AI result.

I'm not sure I'm ready to pass off AI as my own and pretend I'm smarter than I am, when I'm not.

Just how I"m going to roll with it for now, everyone has their own way.
Maybe one day I'll have a more serious look at it.

ttbn,

I'll have to drudge my way through many threads with Ctrl+F to find the pizza comment because you're full history returns a server error, and Google hasn't indexed it so a "site" search returns nothing. You may not like pizza, but you don't need to given it's a very well known AI slip-up. I'll let you know if I find anything.

Anyway, you accused me of being "robotic" and, then spent three paragraphs on personal insults. None of that addresses the claim under discussion.

The issue was simple: the idea that Nazism was left wing; presumably of the word "socialist", given your sudden referring to them using the unnecessarily-long label of "National Socialists". But the word "socialist" was there to attract working-class voters in the 1920s, not to describe the ideology - which is why the Nazis immediately crushed actual socialists once in power.

Your claim doesn't survive even basic historical scrutiny. The Nazis defined themselves by their anti-Marxism stance, destroyed socialist and communist organisations, and sat firmly in the authoritarian, nationalist, anti-egalitarian tradition. That's why the argument keeps collapsing back into tone and abuse instead of substance.

If you want to argue otherwise, do it on the history. If not, there's nothing left to resolve here.

A slightly side issue, which I am sure others have said with greater clarity and emphasis.
However....
Laws need to be generic.
Not written especially for one particular group or section of our society.
So the leader of the 'opposition' is way off the mark when she discusses amendments to 'hate' laws.
The principles on which she bases her thinking are not as they should be.
Time for her to re-think her leadership.
Or time for the party to rethink it.

Hi John,

I think Nazism and Stalinist ideology are examples where two seemingly diametrically opposing political systems were in fact linked in many ways, with commonality in the ways they operated. I don't believe in the left/right political principle as a linear expression where those on the extreme left are totally opposite to those on the extreme right. I'm more the believer in the "Horseshoe Political Principle" with moderates at the top centre and the "left" and "right" at the tips, bring both the left and right closer together, more in common with each other, than they have with moderates. I'm saying at another time Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin could have been the best of mates, having long conversation about who to murder next!
Same with radicalism, take Germany for example, in the 1920's Nazism was part of the political extreme and therefore radical. by the mid 1930's Nazism had become the accepted as the new normal, and people such as liberal democrats, once viewed as moderates, were then the outliers, and therefore the extreme. Do I make any sense to you on this.

Hi Paul,

Yes, that makes sense - and I largely agree with you on how authoritarian systems behave once they reach power. Where I think the confusion creeps in is between how regimes operate and where their ideologies come from.

The horseshoe model is useful as a visual representation of the fact that extremes end up using similar tools (repression, violence, enforced conformity). But that convergence doesn't make them ideologically interchangeable or place Nazism on the left, as you would know, and the horseshoe model risks blurring the distinction here.

So I'm not defending a simplistic left-right line where everything is neat and symmetrical. I'm just pushing back on the specific claim that Nazism was "left wing" in origin or intent, as opposed to authoritarian in outcome.

Regarding radicalism becoming normalised once it captures the state, I completely agree. That's one of the most dangerous dynamics in politics, and it's why liberal democracy gets squeezed from both sides when extremes take over.

Thanks John,

There is a belief that Hitler dabbled in Communism early on, some grainy footage of him at a Communist rally. Hitler at that time, being highly dissatisfied with the political and social status quo in Germany, was probably looking at radical alternatives as a way to avenge the wrongs of the past, as he seen them. Hitler joined the German Workers Party in 1919, fortunately for Hitler the GWP suffered from leadership problem (vacuum), Hitler was able to fill that position, and then mould the GWP into what he believed it should be, and it worked. BTW When Hitler was cementing himself into the GWP, the German Communist Party (KPD) was much bigger, and had strong leadership in Ernst Thalmann, who led the KPD from 1925 until his execution by the Nazi regime in 1944. The KPD was never complete annihilated by the Nazis, and in 1946 it came back to power in East Germany with the likes of Walter Ulbricht assuming control as a Satanist puppet. East Germany = German DEMOCRATIC Republic, Fortunately for us the GDR was DEMOCRATIC, it was in their name!

Nick Cater describes Albanese's response to Bondi as “clueless”, and entering a more dangerous phase, with urgency replacing seriousness, leading to mistakes being made.

Parliament should reject the botched hate speech legislation.

Unless we want to lose democracy altogether, this Albanese rubbish must go. No amendments from the daft Opposition; just get rid of it.

Hatred is/will be defined by the prevailing ideology, and under Albanese's ideology, he, or the captured judiciary, would decide what constitutes hate speech - without anybody having to make a complaint. Another leap towards totalitarianism. The judiciary has been trashed by the likes of the Supreme Court judge who deemed the illegal hate-march across Sydney Harbour Bridge was OK because it was “in the public interest”.

The legislation is so vague that terms like offensive, vilifying, humiliating, and harmful will mean what some judge or political commissar wants them to mean.

Legal precedents show that a neutral stance from politicians and government officials cannot be expected.

Cater warns us against being “railroaded” by Albanese’s “policy hyperactivity, the chief aim of which is to obscure his feckless response (to) the tragedy so far”.

Then there is the Left's tendency to judge policy by its ‘intended’ results instead of real world outcomes.

It is highly unlikely that Albanese's dog's breakfast legislation would result in stopping another Bondi-type incident occurring in the future. And, the unmentioned matter of Islamic terror could not be openly discussed. The cause of it all could not be discussed. Pure politics making Australian society more unsafe than it is now.

Additionally, lawyers advise that the legislation just requires a hatepreacher to quote a religious texts to avoid hatespeech prosecution.

https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/politics/notorious-preacher-wissam-haddad-plans-to-target-young-children-with-cartoon-broadcasting-his-preachings/news-story/670c1744f4d797db8bd69db7dcc04d86

Paul,

I'm sceptical of the idea that Hitler genuinely dabbled in communism. As you may recall me mentioning once before, I've read Mein Kampf (although not five different editions of it in seven different languages like mhaze) and in it he portrays himself as hostile to Marxism from very early on, even describing how isolated he was from other workers because of their union affiliations.

It's clear he encountered communist activity in post-war Munich. At that point, however, he was keeping an eye on radical groups for the German army. His his later politics look much more like a deliberate attempt to outflank Marxism than a path that ever meaningfully passed through it.

Marxism-crushing conservatism at it's finest - not like today's wets!
_____

ttbn,

You keep asserting that this legislation allows people to be punished for "holding beliefs", or that the government or judiciary can act without any evidentiary threshold.

That claim still isn't supported by the bill.

The offences relate to conduct that incites hatred, violence or discrimination, not to private beliefs, opinions, or criticism. "Without a complaint" does not mean "without evidence", nor does it mean the executive gets to declare something hateful by fiat.

If you think a specific provision does what you're claiming, point to it. Otherwise this remains rhetoric, not analysis.

Hi again John,

I agree with what you say about Hitler, there's no real evidence that he went "commo", but its a fact he was enlisted as an agent for the German Army to spy on the GWP, rather than spying he become the party leader.
BTW, Something against Hitler joining the German Communist, is the KPD was top heavy with Jews, Hitler wouldn't have liked that.

Yes, the Trumpster claims to be as learned as that well known part time Greek philosopher, and full time owner of the "Parthenon" take-a-way in downtown Marrickville, ARSETHROTTLE. Even if his philosophy isn't all that good can't deny Arsethrttle does a bloody excellent Greek Souvlaki at the Parthenon late on a Friday night. Trumpster can testify to that fact in five different languages.

The Institute of Public Affairs submission on the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism Bill 2026 (the bill):

. The Bill criminalises opinions about key matters of public policy and would allow the government to imprison its political opponents.

.Criminal penalties will apply even if there is no victim and harm is hypothetical, which would lead to Australians being imprisoned based on entirely fictitious scenarios.

.The bill violates basic rule of law principles, and will open the door to a police state.

.The bill confers on a government minister an anti-democratic power to prohibit groups which will allow the government to disband its political opponents.

.The overly broad application of the provisions in the bill will result in mainstream Australians being targeted.

The IPA list is just a series of conclusions, ttbn, not explanations.

Saying "the bill criminalises opinions" doesn't make it so. You still have to point to a provision that does this. So far, nobody has.

Criminal law routinely operates without a named victim (conspiracy, incitement, threats, terrorism, organised crime). That isn't new, and it isn't a police state. Harm being prospective rather than retrospective is exactly why those offences exist.

Likewise, ministers already have powers to proscribe organisations under counter-terror and criminal law, subject to judicial review. That isn't the government "disbanding its political opponents", it's standard state authority bounded by courts.

If the argument is that thresholds are too low or definitions too broad, that's a legitimate drafting critique. But jumping straight from "I don't like this law" to "police state" without engaging the text is just rhetoric.

JD,

You could perhaps voice your opinion to the IPA; but I don't think that they would be any more interested in your scolding than I am.

Or, you could get a budgerigar and teach it to repeat your horseshit back to you.

I didn't offer my opinion, ttbn.

//You could perhaps voice your opinion to the IPA;//

And I'm not sure what this would accomplish. The IPA is just a partisan think tank, and they probably already what it is they're doing there.

You've moved from "this bill criminalises opinion" to insults without ever pointing to a provision that does so. Invoking the IPA doesn't change that.

I'm happy to look at the text if you ever want to.

Everything here is just everyone trying to find a way to please everyone.
All moslems are committed to Sharia Law and the Caliphate.
That requires the removal of democracy, parliament and all laws
introduce by parliaments.
Just give up on pleasing everyone , Parliament included, and just
issue an "order" to all moslems;
Get rid of those moslems that want to introduce a Caliphate or we
will be forced to get rid of all moslems.
Such an procedure should pick up all extremists.
Those that use the verse of the Koran that allows to deceive infidels
could be detected by their previous affiliations and intense examination.
If you think that is too draconian come up with something better.

Bezza,

" we will be forced to get rid of all moslems." The word today is Muslims, and it's a proper noun with a capital "M". And you claim to be an expert on the teachings of Islam, yet you admit you have never read anything on the subject, except for watching Youtube nut jobs.

So my Turkish friend, who is Muslim, and has been in Australia for more than 40 years, now an Australian citizen, with Australian born children and grandchildren should be in your words "got rid of". If anyone should be got rid of, it the bigoted hateful fools, not the decent folk who have made a home here, and a life for themselves and their children.

p/s How would you propose that people you don't want here be "got rid off" I assume you would favour some kind of final solution, your kind always do.

There you go again making assumptions.
The only thing I watch on utbe is about EVs.
I thought I made it clear;
Like Europe and other places the Islamic terrorists have made trouble
everywhere and we, with the help of moslems, cannot get rid of them
then we either wait to be killed for rejecting Allah & Islam or we
have to do very hard thing and rid the country of all Moslems.

If the Muslims cannot get rid of the terrorists by helping our government
then what option do we have ?
Pay them money to be quite, no that would insult them.
Remember they are religious fanatics !
Ask them would they please go somewhere else !
Your problem is you do not understand.
Your options are pay the Jizaz tax and be a 2nd class citizen or
become a Muslim. Think they would take your word for it ?
Only takes one to denounce you and you die.
Thems your choices, what would you do ?