Once again the AHRC has dredged up an "offended" whinger to file a complaint this time against Sonia Kruger expressing her personal opinion on Muslim immigration. This process will cost 9 news $100 000s and a huge amount of time which supposedly can be claimed back from Sam Ekermawi (the offenderati) which will never happen as "Sam" is unlikely to be able to stump up and has already applied for legal aid (which should be refused on the basis of the frivolity of the case).

Sonia stated, "Personally I would like to see it stopped now for Australia because I would like to feel safe as all of our citizens do when they go out to celebrate Australia Day and I'd like to see freedom of speech."

Apparently freedom of speech is a very low priority for the AHRC. Section 18c should be scrapped.

Not again! Is this the second time this brave young woman is to be pilloried by the anti-free speech brigade?

Being what some name a left tard you would think I would rush to take issue with shadow minister on this, far from it! about 80 percent of us, from all partys,are weary of any form of PC , ever willing to get out raged about just about any thing those who farm for PC causes do so in my view without ever getting thinking people's support last night an aged Bert Newton joked as he has for 50 years,and the wet hanky mob are after him too,if its PC its an effort to control our way of thinking

Shadow Minister - Where is your link to article or info?

Shadow Minister,

Is this case really still going to trial?

Wasn't it supposed to have gone before the courts
in early June?

Give us the link for your information.

It does appear that it was supposed to have had a hearing on June 19 but I can't find from after that date on the outcome

https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/morning-shows/sonia-kruger-has-failed-to-have-racial-vilification-complaint-against-her-dismissed/news-story/eeeddf0544c7edfefeec01071f35c800

Not a case I've followed but from the little I've seen it does seem one where the complaint if upheld would place the ability to publicly discuss controversial issues further at risk. That is I guess the intent but in my view very counter productive.

I'm somewhat ambivalent on the specific topic, I'd like better screening of migrants from some cultures to ensure that there is not a strong objection to some basic freedoms which I consider important but I'm not convinced a blanket ban helps either. I do think that trying to shut down debate also shuts down the opportunity to rebut bad idea's or if not an entirely bad idea to separate out the good from the bad.

My gut feel is that those who try to silence other views with the force of law have to some extent conceded the correctness of those ideas and don't have viable arguments against them.

R0bert