Foxy,

Neither Bernard Shaw nor Yassmin are being pilloried for their beliefs, they are being pilloried for their nonsensical statements that were farcical in the face of all the evidence, and their acting as apologists for oppressive regimes and gross human rights violations.

Yassmin in particular is well educated and travelled and cannot be unaware of the shoddy treatment of women under Islam, and the texts even in the Koran itself that devalue women, let alone every single major scholarly text on the issue.

So to claim that Islam is the most feminist religion, Yassmin had to be lying, and knowingly so.

Secondly, If Joe Bloggs was a committed white supremacist would you also support him thus:

"Unless we can create a fair-minded environment for debate we prevent people like Joe Bloggs, and those who critique his interpretation of race, from holding the discussions our democracy needs."

Banjo's post, along with the latest Moslem murder rampage in Britain, shows not why we should not only keep the mongrels out of the country but should send back to Mozzieland all those in it. The riots the Moslem Fifth Column caused at Cronulla followed from similar insults to non-Moslem women.

delete first occurrence of"not". Sorry.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Would I support the right of a white supremacist to speak?

As Senator George Brandis told us -

"Everyone has the right to be a bigot."
(Or words to that effect).

He was I assume, referring to free speech.

And in this country, free speech is one of our core values.

Would I support the supremacist's right to speak?

Yes.

The man's views would speak for themselves and
people could judge him accordingly.
Also, we have laws that govern hate speech.
They would be put in force if the man crossed the line.

cont'd ...

Dear Shadow Minister,

George Bernard Shaw and Yassmin certainly did make
nonsensical statements as far as we're concerned.
However those nonsensical statements are what they
believed to be true and to accuse them of lying is
simply not correct from their point of view.

We have as a perfect example people who deny the
effects of pollution on the environment despite
the evidence being presented. Are those people
liars?

It's a question of what people choose to believe.
I'm sure there are many other examples that we could
come up with but you get the drift.

Foxy: What actual evidence has been presented for AGW? The only scientists I can recall who actually research the drivers of climate change are Nir Shivav, Henrik Svensmark, E. Frits-Christenaen and as couple of others whose names have slipped my mind. A handful. The list published by IPCC and frequently brandished by the faithful - even the minority who are actual qualified scientists - work in fields other than examining the interaction of climate variation with drivers of which atmospheric CO2 is only a minor contributor.

A Christian who tells an audience of atheists that Jesus walked on water is peddling a warped view but not necessarily lying. One who tells atheists the Christian religion calls homosexuality a sin against God is lying. Yassmin Thingummy knowingly described Islam as feminist. It is not. Its well known texts say its not. The well known laws it adopts in Moslem-ruled countries (remember the Channel Nine kerfuffle with Islamic Lebanon?) say it's not. Yassmin Thing assessed her non-Moslem audience as being iggo about this and took a punt on lying to them. Yes, lying. Even Senator Lambie, who had clearly not studied Islam in any depth, knew enough about Islam to nail her.