Paul1405, Australia First's resistance list is not a joke.
And why shouldn't they be allowed to suggest passive resistance and noncompliance against any political policy or social change they disagree with?

They are not endorsing aggressive or destructive behaviour.

Why should they be hauled off to court for such a non-aggressive strategy?

Shock,

As far as I'm aware The Australia First Party is not being hauled off to court for anything at the moment, but I don't take a lot of interest in some lunatics with ratbag policies that scored less than ZERO POINT ONE PERCENT of the vote. Even the good "Doctor" could only manage 617 votes, they are a joke on the fringe and lets hope they stay that way. Having strong laws on the subject will ensure the far right wont gain traction for their hate speak.

Shock, you say; "And why shouldn't they be allowed to suggest passive resistance and noncompliance against any political policy or social change they disagree with? They are not endorsing aggressive or destructive behaviour."
I don't have an issue with that statement, will the extreme abide by what you say? Possibly, given the existing laws we have in place. Dismantle those laws, and the answer then is, I don't know, but I doubt they would, given their track record around the world

Paul1405,

Was it you who said he stood for the Greens at the recent NSW local government elections? How many votes did you get?

Beach, around about 25 times great that Dr Jim at the federal poll. Out of the 7 candidates the good doctor ran dead last! Shows that the electorate is not fooled yet by some ex con from the lunatic right. LOL

Jim Saleam, was arrested in 1974 and found guilty of firebombing a left-wing Brisbane bookshop. After the collapse of the Nazi Party in the mid-'70s, Saleam moved to Sydney. The most serious act of violence occurred in January 1989, when the home of the Australian representative of the African National Congress, Eddie Funde, was shot at. Two NA members were arrested. Saleam was sentenced to three and a half years jail. This was his second time inside.
And you don't think these kinds of people are not capable of race hate and incitement to violence if laws are changed.

Paul1405, so these law are repealed, which encourages some to voice even more extreme views.

So what? You admit they're politically insignificant.
More extreme statements would win them even less votes!

At least you'd know whether you're really dealing with sheep or wolves, as subterfuge would no longer be necessary.

Andrew Bolt made no "extreme" statements and he ended up in court because of these laws. A waste of his and the public's resources.

Dear Shocker,

Andrew Bolt ended up in court because he got his facts
wrong - as the following link explains:

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/andrew-bolt-trifled-with-the-facts-20110928-1kxba.html

As we all know free speech is not an unfettered right.
It doesn't have to be balanced or fair but it should be
factually accurate.