Paul1405:

I am sure NNN can stand up for himself and it is very patronising of you to answer on his behalf. Of course you are actually answering on your own behalf about you own issues with attention seeking on the forum.

You said you would take on board my comments about your own abuse of the forum but you obviously still harbor resentment about my comments. Either you take it on board or you don’t. You obviously do not agree with me that this is not the place to be a comedian so why not? Why do you think it is appropriate to use this place for attention seeking in respect to your humour? If you want people to respect you humour why not go to a place where they judge that kind of thing on its own merits unless you are afraid that you are not funny and that you really are just seeking attention?

“Like me who takes no offence at anything that is posted,”

You seem to be taking offence at what I am posting.

“but no being GY I like you have no say in the matter.”

Well if I have no say in the matter then you have nothing to worry about do you? So why are you complaining about it?

NNN:

“You think I was joking? No it was serious comparing plumbers and judges to expand your point.”

OK if you are only joking then you should not need to explain yourself. You will get nowhere in stand-up if you have to keep explaining which things are jokes and which are not. But then you could just blame the audience for not having a sense of humour.

LEOJ:

“In Australia she is guaranteed by law of being shown the respect, fairness and human decency that from her alleged behaviour she herself doesn't return and even despises.”

You still haven’t explained how standing for a judge shows respect and how refusing to do so shows disrespect.

This is not a minor offence, & it has nothing to do with respect for the particular judge. It is respect for our law, & our country.

This must be a deportation offence. It must be made totally clear that there is a simple cost to living in our country, & accepting our welfare/charity. That is acceptance of & compliance with our laws & customs.

Anyone making such grandiose statements of disrespect for us, our country & our laws should be removed immediately from our country, & dumped in whatever hell hole they came from.

In whatever hell hole she came from, she would have been beheaded if she had shown such disrespect for those in charge. What we need is perhaps some of their law enforcement ideas, just not their people.

phanto
I wrote “You think I was joking? No it was serious".
Will I spell it out again?

Toni,

"Contempt of court is a made-up offence, designed to extract heftier fines from the irreverent. Won't swear on the Bible? Contempt! Fine: 50 dollarpounds, Do Not Pass Go etc.

Bit of a poor rub if you're a committed but desperately poor atheist without even 5 dollarpounds to your name... you'll wind up greater than 45 dollarpounds in debt for no worse crime than having courage in your convictions."

Bit out of touch there.

An atheist, poor or rich, can make an affirmation instead of an oath, such as

"I solemnly and sincerely declare and affirm that the evidence I shall give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth."

No one is forced to swear on a Bible in Australian Courts, in fact, in Christian theology forced swearing is null and void.

Just a point, but how do we know that the person appearing in court is the person called, if they are completely covered and no one can see their face?

NNN:

Yeah you had better because I can't tell the difference between your jokes and your serious comments and if it is really important to you then you will want to make sure that you are understood.

phanto
It's all serious rather than comedy, which seems a serious matter to you.
NSW Act:
.." that behaviour is disrespectful to the Court or the Judge presiding over the proceedings (according to established court practice and convention). Maximum penalty: 14 days imprisonment or ".

So they can't define what has to be done and anyway it's just stuff that used to be done. They used torture in the past so that can be legal today. Paul Keating grabbed the Queen, in Trump practice and convention, but against the convention for royalty, and judges represent the Queen so who knows what the conventions are?