Maximillion,

I've got to keep reminding myself that irony is not always understood. It can fly over the heads of the literal-minded. But it seemed to me that a 'street poll' would be an appropriate response to your grandiose claim on behalf of the nation that Marcus Einfeld "has let the whole country down".

I should have been blunter. Einfled hadn't let me down and I don't ceded my right to you to say whether I feel let down - and I'm part of the nation. Please don't claim to speak for the whole nation without warrant.

Antiseptic,

" See what happens when you try to be a smartarse, especially when you're so obviously ill-equipped?"

As I said, on Saturday: "Personal abuse is usually a sign of losing your grip on the argument."

"... expect to be treated as the lightweight you come across as. Thanks for the chance to clear that up." Well I gave you the chance; why didn't you take it?

..." you snidely tried to impute anti-semitic motives to me and others who have been criticising Einfeld." I ask again since you didn't answer the first time, who was it who introduced anti-semitism into this thread?

"My recommendation to you is that you respond to questions properly if you'd like to avoid misunderstandings." So I have to answer your questions 'properly' but you can please yourself about my questions to you?

You see what I mean by the whiff of hypocrisy?

Spikey: Irony is a little difficult to carry off in the written word, perhaps you shouldn't try? I do have a somewhat literal turn of mind, but also appreciate irony, and sarcasm etc. Without the visual and aural clues though, it can certainly be easily misunderstood. That is why I tend to take posts literally, it's far safer than risking misinterpretation and the problems that causes.
As for your other statement, I wasn't claiming to speak for you or anyone else, merely expressing my personal opinion. If I'd said that the whole nation felt let down, then you'd be right, so you have misunderstood what I wrote. See what I mean? It's easy to do, isn't it?
Foxy, the point is, he IS who he is, and as such, is worthy of coverage and comment surely? He was certainly happy to use his status and position to court the media and bask in the attention when he did good, so must cop it sweet when it's not nice to him now, it goes with the territory. When you pick up a dollar, you get both sides of the coin, like it or not.

I strongly disagree with those who say Einfeld has not done everyone a favor. For one thing he has not been sentenced according to the law of Australia, but according to the law of a rebel State called New South Wales. Since the 21st October 2001, any arbitrary imprisonment of anyone, has been illegal. The Criminal Code Act 1995 ( Cth) was declared a universal Australian Law, on the 16th October 2001, and any sentencing in violation of Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is now punishable by 17 years imprisonment. It is an offence against S 268.12 Crime against humanity; imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty.

Article 9 .1 says: Everyone, including Einfeld, has the right to liberty and security of the person. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention. The key word here is arbitrary. Those of you who are native English speakers with access to a Dictionary, will understand what arbitrary means. It means on the whim of one person., derived from opinion, capricious, unrestrained, despotic. Noah Webster the American states it means: uncertain, depending on an arbiters decision, given, adjudged, or done according to ones will or discretion, decided by an arbiter rather than by law. Imperious, tyrannical uncontrolled.

Any fellow OLO traveler, who has read John Grisham’s Innocent Man, and knows a bit of law, would have realized that in Oklahoma, where it is set, both sentencing and guilt were determined by the jury there. United States law derives from the same roots as the law in Australia.

There is another wicked individual running around the country paid for by the Commonwealth, trying to convince us that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is not already part of our law.

Justice Einfeld is entitled to the benefit of the Australian Constitution. He is entitled to the benefit of the laws of the Parliament of the Commonwealth. The Criminal Code Act 1995 ( Cth) is such a law, and because he has been arbitrarily sentenced, he is entitled to be released immediately

spikey:"So I have to answer your questions 'properly' but you can please yourself about my questions to you?"

I've answered your questions to me, including the one you reiterated in your latest post. Now, how about those questions to you?

Squirm all you like, spikey, your intent was to imply some nasty motives to me and others for expressing our opinions about Einfeld. You got called on it and you don't much like it when people catch you out, do you?

Antiseptic,

"Squirm all you like, spikey, your intent was to imply some nasty motives to me and others for expressing our opinions about Einfeld. You got called on it and you don't much like it when people catch you out, do you?"

I'm not squirming at all. Yes, my intent was to imply some nasty motives. And I explained what I thought those nasty motives might have been - Marcus Einfled made some powerful enemies because of his outstanding leadership in human rights and Indigenous issues.

Claim what you like about my intent, the fact remains, you were the first to raise anti-semitism.

Antiseptic Friday 27 March: "What are you suggesting, spikey, without having the guts to use the word? Anti-semitism? Hahahaha. I was wondering how long it would take. The Jewish Community has been conspicuously silent in his defence, now he's been convicted. It must be time to invoke the great conversation-stopper, eh?"

Despite my absolute denial that that was my intent - and you ignored my explanation - you've kept the anti-semitic theme running.

I suggested once before that you were possibly engaged in projection. Is that what's going on in when you ask: "you don't much like it when people catch you out, do you?"

Dear Max,

Perhaps the reason Justice wears a blindfold
is not to judge men like Marcus Einfeld too
severely? Just a thought...

Seriously though, you're right of-course.

I just can't help liking the man, that's all.
To me he's a unique individual - warts and all.
I'd still like him as a judge, if I was on trial.
(But I wouldn't lend him my car).