Bill Leak is a cartoonist, who did a cartoon highlighting the dismal state of some dysfunctional familes in central Australia. I can’t show you that cartoon and we can’t discuss appalling crime statistics nor why “women of a certain ethnic group are 30 times (or 80 times) more likely to be beaten and hospitalized.” Two women die every week but we can’t talk about the problem of people who stomp on someone else’s head because words might offend someone.)
(You can see that cartoon at the Daily Telegraph).
Steyn points out that some Australians think that there are higher priorities than removing 18C, but I’m with him, all freedoms start with free speech. Until we get rid of 18C we can’t even discuss other problems.
The Human Rights Commission (HRC) takes $25 million dollars a year from Australians to stop people talking.
Steyn — The point of the HRC is to shut people up. His advice is not to defend or debate the forbidden topic, but to make the HRC the topic:
I hope The Australian won’t compound that mistake by vigorously defending the cartoon on its merits. When Maclean’s and I ran afoul of the equivalent Canadian law – Section 13 – over a book excerpt from America Alone, the most important decision we made was not to defend the content of the piece: the facts, the quotes, the statistics, the conclusions, etc. Our opponents were not disputing our position; they were disputing our right to have a position.
Likewise, Mr Leak’s opponents are not attempting to engage him in debate; they’re attempting to close down the debate. And there’s no point getting in a debate with someone whose only argument is “Shut up – or else.”
In that sense, the Australian “human rights” regime and the Charlie Hebdo killers are merely different points on the same continuum: They’re both in the shut-up business, and they shut you up pour encourager les autres. They know that, for every cartoonist they silence, a thousand more will never peep up in the first place.
So this isn’t a debate about aboriginal policy or Islamic imperialism or anything else. It’s a debate about whether we’re free to debate. I take the view that the Australian state, like the Canadian state, should not be in the shut-up business. And, when they are, it’s they who are the issue, not you. When it’s a contest between a book or cartoon, on the one hand, and, on the other, a guy who says, “You can’t say that!”, it’s the latter who’s on trial. If you’re on the side that’s saying “Shut up!”, you’re on the wrong side.
[UPDATE: The sleazy tone-deaf Australian “Race Discrimination” Commissar, Tim Soutphommasane, confirms my point with the usual bland evasions of his totalitarian bureaucracy:
Cartoons will be subject to all matter of public debate. It’s a healthy part of our democracy that we have that debate.
Sorry. A legal action is not a “debate”. Mr Leak is being “subject to” not debate but state thought-policing. Because ideological enforcers like Soutphommasane find debate too tiresome and its results too unpredictable. Which is why he gets a third of a million a year from Australian taxpayers to prevent debate.]
The likes of Commissar Soutphommasane are not interested in a debate with you; they’re interested in eliminating you from the debate…
I am, unfortunately, not being satirical when I say we can’t discuss the deadly and dismal problems affecting certain ethnic groups. Please in comments, be mindful, that this post is about Section 18C.
The law reads:
Offensive behaviour because of race, colour or national or ethnic origin
(1) It is unlawful for a person to do an act, otherwise than in private, if:
- (a) the act is reasonably likely, in all the circumstances, to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people; and
- (b) the act is done because of the race, colour or national or ethnic origin of the other person or of some or all of the people in the group.
The Human Rights Commission helpful explains here with examples just how vague, arbitrary, and subjective this law is. No Australian can know in advance if they are acting illegally unless they say nothing about anything, and that’s the point. No matter how honest you are and despite your good intentions or even if you speak the truth someone else gets paid to decide if a phrase is “likely” to offend, and to judge whether the same words might be legal or illegal if they are art, or you are trying to be funny. Are you a licensed artist? Is your intent “comedic”. The HRC will whip out the Funny-0-meter, the Mind-reader, and Their Lens of Artisticiness.
The IPA wants to repeal 18C. It should take five minutes in parliament to get rid of the words “insult” and “offend”.
Some thoughts that are used in debate,
May fall foul of an arm of the state,
And one can’t, by the way,
Suggest thoughts we can’t say,
As to do so invites a court date.
–Ruairi
If the left had their way they would include global warming sceptism in addition to race colour etc.
352
If they had their way, it would be far, far, worse. The pogrom that would ensue, if the Left had their way, would be of Pol Pot proportions (metaphorically speaking).
210
Bemused, I think you can safely dispense with your qualifier. If you’re out of a job and e-blocked from societal participation the end result may be the same.
The cultural Marxists rely on creating ever smaller victim groups to add to their growing list of offendodrons. The resultant fragmentation and disintegration of the societal fabric is their goal and our incarceration. Asserting an untrammelled life requires cleansing civilised society of uncivilising Marxist influencers, like the UN manikin of euphemistically described ‘Human Rights’.
The UN have a penchant for adopting terms that are designed to misdirect. ‘Climate change’, ‘civil society’ are excellent examples. ‘Human Rights’ is yet another. Australian law provides ample redress for those that feel they have been impugned or maligned through slanderous statements.
161
Its probably a good time to bring up Saul Alynski ( the same who dedicated his book “Rules for Radicals” to the Devil ) , who always said “the issue isnt the issue” – namely the “issue” if the day was a vehicle, not a cause.
As Jo points out, the HRC may be a blunt instrument to silence dissent, as such the issue isnt the offence, its the fact the HRC exists at all….
Its also worth quoting from a well known Communist organizations rule book :
Article 29.
http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/
(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
Translation >> no rules , anything goes…. you can marry your horse if you want to….
(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
Translation >> Anything goes – dont criticise someone marrying their hors e- that is horsist….
In fact , if you speak object to sociey breaking down, you will be thrown in the slammer…
(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Translation >> Do as youre told, serf….or else….
Alynski would be proud….
51
The saddest part about the U.N. ‘Declaration of Human Rights’, is that an Australian – Herbert Vere Evatt – leader of the Labor Party (or course), and third President of the U.N. General Assembly, was one of the main architects and proponents of that monstrosity which was passed under his U.N. Presidency.
You’re right Steve, 18C has been passed off almost as a bridging device to make way for our complete adoption of the U.N. DoHR. It’s all about shutting down the expression of thought and speech whilst preventing public debates ABOUT the meaning of words such as morality.
The Global State becomes the arbiter of what ‘moral’ means, and the power to even begin to debate the meaning of words which end up in legislation is taken away from the ‘electorate’; not that there is an electorate with the U.N., and not as if I would agree to be part of one if a U.N. Parliament was ever introduced, because the Western World would be outvoted perpetually in such a parliament.
18C only applies to racial/ethnic ‘discrimination’, but could you imagine what such a law, if it covered gender identity could do once ‘marriage equality’ were passed? Such a law mixed with other laws passed to re-define pre-existing words – like ‘marriage’ – would be a one-two-punch to ANYONE, who for whatever personal reason, might want to maintain any semblance of Freedom of Association; especially in regards to religious sanctuary.
18C is a VERY BIG REASON why people such as myself, are shuddering at the prospect of ANY codified ‘equality’ laws being passed, because the dogmatic adherence to the totalitarian uses of 18C that Labor and the Greens have made quite clear is their unwavering prerogative, exposes that any such moves to change the law are simply designed to bludgeon and balkanize the public for political purposes, rather than to achieve any possible protections.
All of these types of laws are designed to CAUSE SOCIAL FRICTION, not to prevent social friction … not to mention their ability to begin the 1984esque self-censorship predicted presciently by Orwell; where the State declares jurisdiction first over the dictionary, then the mouth, and finally the brain. Individual expression becomes totally homogenized for the sake of ‘diversity’ – an oxymoron.
… and what does Malcolm Turnbull do? Sits in his sand box laughing at all the remaining conservatives in his Party and in Australia that he has completely marginalized, whilst Labor and the Greens grin and laugh at the pathetic spectacle, that is, the death of political conservatism.
No wonder One Nation is rising so quickly … the LNP is committing political suicide and Labor and the Greens can smell the blood in the water whilst they circle the wagons stirring up issues of identity politics to consume 100% of Turnbull’s time in the perpetually and effectively ‘hung’ joint house of pain known as Parliament.
120
Said Shorten to Turd, with a grunt
Don’t you dare ever call me a runt
I know that I’m small
And I know sweet F*?! all
But I’m hurt when you call me a C*#?!
121
“Labor and the Greens can smell the blood in the water whilst they circle the wagons”
Nice mixed metaphor, EWO, but I know what you mean.
50
As I’ve said a few times, we have globalists running both “left” and “right” camps now.
Malcolm is a champers socialist. Little Johnny brought in the socialist dream of gun control. Shortning is a leftist who will do as he’s told.
Saul Alynski was a “Community Organizer” – we normally refer to them as left wing agitators / communists / ratbags, who should be peretually monitored for the danger they pose to democratic society.
As I’ve said bluntly before, and speaking from my own Conservative Christian point of view ( which as a Conservative Christian makes me an endangered species in the eyes of any Leftie and the UN…) that cultural marxism is about trashing society and waging war against Christainity. Now before people object, the reality is that Christainity has provided not just codes of morals and ethics, but also places of learning – most universities can be traced back to religious orders who saw no conflict between faith and science.
There is a deliberate war against Christianity as it underpins most of the west, and is a bulwark against humanities’ darker side and also recongises freedom of religion ( a key point here..). This is a religious war – despite the very base noisy seagull-like approach of the Left to try and rip apart decency and marriage and morals and replace it with nhilism and savagery, Christianity is standing against it all. This is why the Left hates biblical marriage so much it has attempted to undermine Christinity via implementing abortion, attacking marriage, stifling freedom of religious expression by saying we cant oppose things abhorrent to YHWH God publically, and generally trying to overthrow any thing decent and fair.
I think its also time to admit we are in a fight for our very freedoms as the Left closes in on our lives – we need to push back and giove the left a verbal blood nose now before its too late.
If the UN does in fact rise up as a global govt, based on what Christians see as clearly occult and demonic “values” which the God-less evil clearly Left loves, it will be proof we are in the last days in a count down to Armageddon, as we will have a global govt under Satanic control dedicated to eradicating Christainity from the face of the earth. we shoudl also then see the rise of the Biblical Antichrist – a man able to break the political log jam in the mid east with Israel and the “Palestinians” beinga smooth leader for 3.5 years, then reverting to his genocidal self for the remaining 3.5 yeas , as prophesised. IN Israel, then is a rising expectation of the the Messiah ( Jesus ) appearing soon.
Bear in mind that Satan ( the devil ) hates humanity – the Bibek says man is created in the image of God, Satan hates God so guess what? All humanity is fair game – Christians are just top of the list.
Interesting times – if the world does organize into 10 super nations and the antichrist rises, at that point all other religions are moot – the real game is in play.
130
Heard of this globalist? see https://balance1010.wordpress.com/2016/10/19/all-may-still-seem-dark-and-lost-dr-jasser-on-hillary/
20
Original Steve: Although as a conservative Christian you may well be an endangered species, in the eyes of the lefties and the UN you are not, because if you became an endangered species in their life, you would be elevated to the untouchable status of a victim minority, and they’d have to be nice to you!
00
Original Steve: Although as a conservative Christian you may well be an endangered species, in the eyes of the lefties and the UN you are not, because if you became an endangered species in their eyes, you would be elevated to the untouchable status of a victim minority, and they’d have to be nice to you!
00
Evatt when he was Attorney General (ALP) was the creator of the treaty signing between UN member nations, as many as possible covering every conceivable possibility he recommended.
And therefore a way around the sovereign laws of nations if a government decided to ignore the people’s wishes or even a referendum decision.
50
That’s right. Most people don’t even know who Evatt really was, or that he was a Fabian Socialist through and through … just like Bob Hawke minus the habitual drinking … and cut from the same cloth, give Bill Shorten an inch in power, he will use that power to turn this nation into a fully fledged satrapy of the new Global Empire of bureaucrats and ‘economic engineers’ (cartels) … all of them good Socialists who want to ‘control the weather’ (READ: control the people).
My favorite oxymoron is ‘POOLED SOVEREIGNTY’ … yeah, Shorten would ‘pool’ our Sovereignty with Communist’s, Absolutist ‘Monarchies’, and/or Islamist’s quicker than a Union boss would accept a $10k cash bribe.
Pooled Sovereignty is a legalistic sophism that Herbert Vere Evatt would be very proud of.
80
EyesWideOpen – Pooled sovereignty:
Reference speech by Gro Harlem Brundtland
Socialist International
15 -17 September 1992
XIX Congress of the Socialist International
“Social Democracy in a Changing World”
“At the Rio Conference on Environment and Development (1992) it was made clear that we are heading towards a crisis of uncontrollable dimensions unless we change course.
Today we are faced with global challenges that can be addressed only through international cooperation.
Securing peace, sustainable development and democracy requires that nations, in their common interest, establish an effective system of global governance and security.
In an increasingly interdependent world, we must find new ways to live – both within our own countries and on a global level – that are socially, economically, and environmentally sustainable.
What we need is a new social contract. Monetary stability will not suffice. And just as democracy originated in Europe some 2500 years ago, just as social democracy developed in Europe over the past 100 years, so must we again take the lead.
We must curb population growth and reinforce the links between population, poverty-alleviation and the rights of women.
A new social contract must be based on our overriding principles – freedom, solidarity and justice.
To pursue social justice, freedom and democracy will require that we pool our collective experiences and national sovereignties.
There is no alternative to obligatory coordination of financial and monetary policies.”
20
DennisA – Thanks heaps for the above reference; 1992, same year they were launching the Rio initiatives … figures! It just strengthens my 8yr long conviction that ‘climate change’ is THE issue that the globalists are going to use to invoke a Fascist Global State.
From National Socialism to Global Socialism. I guess Hitler also wanted to conquer the world, and I guess all of our Commonwealth war dead did in fact die in vain if we allow these jackboot bureaucrats to ‘pool’ our sovereignty into a meaningless soup. I get a really sour taste in my mouth every ANZAC Day when all the politicians and pundits stand around and proclaim ‘lest we forget’, when it’s pretty clear that in order to understand, and thus remember something – SOVEREIGNTY – one has to understand its meaning, and why it was cherished in the first place.
And the new Sec.Gen of the U.N., is Antonio Guterres, President of the Socialist International for 6 years. Man, I really, really, despise socialists … and when it’s mixed with globalism, and virtue signalling low-information social justice warriors, it just causes my eye to start twitching nervously.
10
For those interested here is a good 7 min 36 sec video on Cultural Marxism. It’s very important that people know what it is and how it’s being used to destroy Western Civilisation.
https://youtu.be/G8pPbrbJJQs
71
That’s the best overview of Cultural Marxism I’ve seen, thanks for linking that David.
20
I would be kidnapped at 3am and sent off to a retraining camp to be converted to a ‘warmist’ or executed
80
As long as you have not looked HERE first, and noted the link on the lower left hand side labeled something like ‘M______d portraits’. Then you might find you do not requiring a haircut and a shave any more.
This link and the views held there are supplied for educational information only, and must be viewed as private only. The link and its content have nothing to do with this (http://joannenova.com.au) blog site, the blog’s owners, the owner publicly expressed views, or (as far as is known) the public views of any commentators on this blog.
41
Obama is edging toward that edge. This week:
“There has to be, I think, some sort of way in which we can sort through information that passes some basic truthiness tests and those that we have to discard, because they just don’t have any basis in anything that’s actually happening in the world.”
“We are going to have to rebuild within this wild-wild-west-of-information flow some sort of curating function that people agree to….”
Of course up in the air is just WHO are the people who “agree to…..”.
In the instance of Global Warming I would guess it would be his EPA and the IPCC.
121
I don’t think anyone needs to even guess who the ‘curators’ will be in this New World Order.
60
They are quite serious about it too.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/09/28/new-low-in-science-criminalizing-climate-change-skeptics.html
41
An Indigenous leader has shouted down Pauline Hanson, calling her a “racist redneck” at … the Cairns Indigenous Art Fair on Saturday…
As she walked down a set of stairs about 2.30pm, Murrandoo Yanner began to yell at her loudly.
“You picked on Aboriginal people, now you are kicking the Muslims around,” he said.
“You are just a racist redneck with your red hair. Go away, go back to Ipswich and your fish and chip shop.
“You’re a disgraceful, you are a woman lacking moral fibre, you are intellectually dishonest and you are not welcome here.”
A large group of people watching then broke out into applause, with some cheering and whistling…
A spokeswoman for the art fair, who saw the incident unfold, said she was surprised the One Nation party leader didn’t stop to engage with the man.
What coarse and intimidatory behaviour. And what a hypocrite to mock Hanson’s red hair while purporting to criticise her as a racist.
This farce is made worse by a “spokeswoman” criticising Hanson for not letter Yanner vent even more at her, and by a reporter who then trawls Twitter for more anti-Hanson abuse.
I note that the Fairfax reporter does not give Yanner’s background, let alone inform the paper’s green-leaning readership what a menace to wildlife Yanner’s brand of racial apartheid actually is. No, nothing must disturb the preferred narrative of Hanson the evil one being confronted by indigenous goodness.
Will he be accused of being “Wasist”?
—[Readers, don’t take publication of this comment as permission to discuss the topics contained within it. – 18C. 18C. 18C. — Jo]
183
Every time this sort of thing happens to Pauline, it converts more and more people to her party.
She knows that and is a lot wiser than she was last time..
.. and that is why she will turn the other cheek.
These people, like the SSM thugs, are their own worst enemy.
202
Yanner hangs around GOC and is a local there. Stirs up a bit.Very much an activist.I’ll say no more.
30
And you notice that nobody has attacked Yanner under 18C for his obviously racist remarks.
90
“someone else gets paid to decide”
That’s what bothers me about 18C – it’s the way it skirts around section 80 of the constitution, and denies defendants a trial by jury. Defamation defendants have the right to request a jury, why not 18C defendants?
182
The Australian Liberty Alliance is also committed to repealing 18C.
http://vote1ala.org/
122
I remember them, weren’t they going to become a major force in Australian politics after the 2016 federal election.
20
The only way forward is to join a major political party and push for change from inside the tent.
20
Just like Mal has?
40
Can we start a petition? Email your local member? As Steyn says, the purpose of the left is to stop debate by shutting people up. How can we best demand action?
112
How can we best demand action?
That depends on your social class.
31
Am I still allowed to refer to your Rugby team (such as it is) as Kangeroos? Or is that offensive to marsupials everywhere?
And what about youse jokers calling our Rugby team “All Blacks”? That has to be offensive because some of them fellas are as white as.
141
You really need to be in a powerful elitist clique, then you can publicly say anything that you consider inoffensive, and have your people clear-up any misguided interpretations applied to your views later.
31
You don’t need an elitist clique. I just say and write what I like. Whether other people consider it offensive or not, is up to them to decide.
If they get stroppy about it, I ask them to explain why they found what I said, to be offensive to them in particular. Invariably they can only find cause in the abstract, and not in the specific.
I also make the point that I cannot influence how they decide what they choose to decide. What they decide is their perogative, and I will not take that away from them.
But I cannot second guess how they might interpret my words, and by the same token, they should not, ad hoc, seek to override my perogative, in selecting the words that I do in crafting prose that reflects my thoughts.
71
And, in front of a judge, all that cost how much?
Right……
30
The question comes down to one of intent. When I wrote, whatever I wrote, did I intend to do harm to any specific person, or was I writing in the abstract? Under English law, on which Australian law is based, that is the test for libel. A different situation, I concede, but surely the legal principles should still apply.
This debate needs to seperate the abstract from the specific. At the present moment, we are discussing a victimless crime, that has no motive, no means, and no opportunity, other than what the self-proclaimed “victim” chooses to identify with.
50
You are offending Wallabies since you seem to be talking Rugby (union). (Rugby) League is the Kangaroos, not sure if you are offending the socceroos though.
But like any training you do on discrimination in the workplace it is purely the ‘perception’ of the person lodging the complaint. What this means is that the most innocent gesture or non-issue becomes one due to the mental fragility of an individual.
An example given in courses I have done involved a weekly Friday afternoon social gathering at the local pub after work. A regular who is always late asks someone to keep a seat for them and when they finally arrived some hours after the others there wasn’t a seat available, thus this is discrimination. This isn’t a specific work organised function yet somehow workplace discrimination laws and practices come into play.
After doing these courses you realise that if you do something or even absolutely nothing there is a possible perception a person has that can be taken offence of and the real clincher is that you have to prove yourself innocent rather than them actually having to prove a valid case.
30
I already did that some time ago.
Because of the Getup campaign, and the Mediscare, we lost our good member for Bass to a lawyer dick from the ALP
I wrote to him and got smartass reply about it was perfectly OK becasue of 18D.
Being a lawyer he would love that because if you are hauled up on 18C, you need a lawyer to plead the 18D case for you.
The system is broken.
50
Tony Abbott is blamed for the failure to change this appalling law and to remove the unnecessary Human Rights Commission. However the senate was and is controlled by Labor and the Greens. His focus was to get the removal of the Mining tax and the Carbon tax through the Senate. After many attempts and because of the Palmer party, he just succeeded. Other changes were and are impossible. We have a dysfunctional government run by the senate. The only things which get through are increases to wages for parliamentarians and public servants and increased taxation.
The boat people disaster with 1200 deaths of men, women and children in the Timor sea was the biggest disaster in Australian history, bigger than all others combined but was not stopped by parliament. It was stopped by Tony Abbott against strident opposition including the ABC who ignored a military blackout and set up a web site to assist smugglers with information on illegal arrivals.
Since the party room coup against Abbott, the new Prime Minister has failed to to anything at all and has achieved nothing, despite his weak claims. Turnbull’s Green Liberal coalition fell apart at the last minute as the Greens reneged. Instead of wiping out Labor, he nearly wiped out the a record Liberals majority achieved by years of hard work by Abbott. Rememeber Turnbull never stopped undermining the Liberals and crossed the floor in 2010 and voted with Labor on Labor’s ETS.
So we had a double dissolution election we did not need which made matters far worse. Now Malcolm’s ineffectual stolen government even lost a vote on the floor, the first time in 55 years. It is one seat rule by a Green PM wearing someone else’s clothes and shoes which are far too big. He will no more stand up for Bill Leak than fight the HRC or the RET. He is parading around as the faux PM no one wanted and no one wants. He wants a Republic, a Very Fast Train, his ETS and Gay Marriage and his own personal Turnbull party.
We need to get rid of these awful things, the RET, Section 18C and the HRC. After all, Australian law is British law. Common law, judge made law and laws passed in parliament. It does not operate on a Bill of Rights like the US, so there is absolutely no point in a Human Rights Commission and the absurd HRC only has power to make trouble and harass innocent people. It is a creature of the extreme Left.
Bring back Tony Abbott. Another Double Dissolution Election. Now. Finish the job. Clean out the senate.
Remove the destructive RET which costs every household in Australia $560 a year, harasses cartoonists who dare parody the truth and sell the ABC, SBS and privatise the BOM. Close the Clean Energy Council. Close the appalling HRC. Get out of the NBN and launch satellites. Take Australia back from the communists and extreme Labor Unions trying to control communications, electrical power, manufacturing, trucking and sea transport. Join Tasmania to the mainland again and stop subsidizing mendicant Labor states like South Australia, Tasmania and the NT and Tasmania with double GST, stealing from States like WA. Welfare makes people dependent on more welfare. Can no one see that borrowing $1Bn a week is going to destroy Australia?
Turnbull must go today. The polls show Abbott is now in opposition again at 47% to 53%. Good. He may as well go to an election with a real reform plan. The alternative will make the disaster in South Australia look like a picnic. SA will not be rescued by submarines.
Labor, the ABC and Fairfax may as well admit it. Ils ne sont jamais Charlie. They were never Charlie. Ils ont menti. The cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo died for nothing.
460
Nice summary, TdeF.
Once again, I tip my hat to you … Unless, of course, somebody in Australia finds hat-tipping to be offensive, or against their religeon, or misaligned with their ethnic culture.
151
Before the PC victim culture started, we’d have told “offended” people to stop sooking, grow a backbone & deal with it…..
130
The Clean Energy Council is membership, event and ‘accreditation’ funded – just sayin’.
The board reads like a who’s who in the Australian renewable energy industry – I wonder how Giles Parkinson didn’t get a guernsey.
Miles George: Managing Director, Infigen Energy
Rachel Watson: General Manager, Group Services, Pacific Hydro
Alex Beckitt: Manager, Policy and Engagement, Hydro Tasmania
Danny Nielsen: Managing Director, Vestas Australian Wind Technology
Samantha Coras: Head of Project Management Australia, First Solar
Chris Judd: CEO and Managing Director, Senvion Australia
Warwick Johnston: Managing Director, Sunwiz
Cameron Garnsworthy: Country Manager, FRV Australia
Lara Olsen: Regional Manager – Business Development, Tesla Energy
https://www.cleanenergycouncil.org.au/about/our-board.html
30
Thank you for mentioning Canada; we have the same problem where someone with hurt feelings can drag a guy into a long and expensive court conflict, at no charge to the “victim”. We are also have commissions looking into an epidemic of violence to certain women that don’t dare acknowledge that most of the women are of a certain earlier immigrant status and that their attackers are also of the same earlier immigrant crowd. Local journalist/pundit Ezra Levant was hauled before the Human Rights Commission by a local Imam because Ezra published the Mohammed cartoons.
81
Bill Leek has a go at at inner city luvvies with fair complexion.
http://quadrant.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/leak-hipsters.jpg
120
Correction: Bill Leak maintains racial balance and harmony.
110
BRILLIANT !! 🙂
101
Pity he can’t do something with caricatures of Triggs and Sopman.
62
This is along the lines Mark Steyn advises against, arguing that the comment was justified. It is not about that.
The argument should be about his fundamental right to make a comment without being prosecuted for offending someone, anyone at all out of 24 million Australians.
Humour is not funny unless someone is the target. Tall, short, ugly, cute, rich, poor, stupid, smart, blonde, brunette, bald, young, old, Irish, Jewish, Catholic. (not allowed even to mention one) Humour always has a target. Making fun of people is humour. Comedians even insult themselves. Steyn is right, we must fight for the right to make a comment without fear of retribution, death by lawsuit or extremist.
Laughter, parody, sarcasm, comment should be a Human Right. Or in Australia, it is legal under our system unless it is made expicitly illegal, which is now true. Increasingly under our public laws you are guilty until proven innocent.
141
How do you deliberately set out to offend somebody, or a group, if they choose not to be offended?
Important point. I cannot force anybody to be offended if they choose not to be. And by the same token, I cannot avoid offending somebody, if they are determined to be offended.
111
Exactly – it is a very subjective gauge and emotively driven – but the sort of stuff the Left loves, as people dont have to think at all…..
70
You can decide to be offended. It is interesting that it has taken two months for the HRC to find someone who has decided to be humiliated by the cartoon, despite public appeals by Discrimination Commissioner Tim Soutphommasane (public servant with a base salary of $320,000) for people to take offence. Surely that is itself offensive? Then the Australian could not even find the allegedly offended person who will presumably be hidden from the public, so that they are not further offended, humiliated and threatened.
It is Bill Leak who is to be threatened and humiliated and financially and personally broken by the HRC by massively salaried secure public servants whose job it is to silence people? Who needs communism? We already have them. All we need is the Lubyanka.
150
TdeF, my trading of it is that the person who has complained has not complained about the cartoon, per se, but that the cartoon led to her being vilified or humiliated by others. Bill Leake has said that he just cannot understand how such a claim can be upheld by the HRC. Nor can I.
20
Damn, reading, not trading.
00
Given that a fundamental of our justice system is that PROOF is required in order to convict a perpetrator, it occurs to me “how can it be proved that someone is “humiliated”. What sort of proof would there bye that the victim was “reasonably humiliated”. The whole thing is a sick farce.
50
Is the HRC made up of the peoples it was drawn up to “protect?” Or is it a bunch of city-dwelling suit-wearing folks who are deciding, for an entirely different group, what is and is not acceptable? Whose values, whose rights, are really being portrayed?
If this HRC is comprised of those who are NOT in the protected classes they are performing an entirely despicable act of offense themselves, in my opinion. They have 1. taken it upon themselves to decide that the protected class cannot protect itself from offense, defamation or libel, 2. taken it upon themselves to inform the protected class what is and is not acceptable to them, 3. Taken away the rights of the protected class to proclaim what they find offensive or not, and 4. Installed themselves as sole authors of the lives these protected classes must lead.
The basest form of discrimination is denying the people the right to decide for themselves, to “parent” and “protect” them as they obviously are unable to do so themselves. Yes, discrimination exists everywhere and should be fought – you never know what genius is being denied, for one reason – but to turn an entire class of people into children in the guise of protecting them is abhorrent. Shuffle them off to the side, keep them out of sight, and pretend your protections are in their best interests, yeah.
We’ve done it here, in the US. Still do it, to more than just group of peoples. The worst thing -anyone- can do is take away the right to fight for oneself. No no, little girl, sit right there, and I will speak for you. You aren’t able to do this, I must do it for you.
Buncha jerks.
Human Rights Groups tend to forget that there are humans involved. They come in and make noise and then leave – and nothing has changed. Oh, maybe a few colorful posters are hung up, some pens passed out, some poor soul is paraded around as an example of what wonderful goodness has poured forth and Saved Him, AMEN! (sorry, carried away, but still…) Very few actually do anything meaningful in terms of bettering anyone’s day to day life.
00
How about a Ghandi-like approach?. If thousands of people go around offending others the PowersThat Be cannot handle it. I will start by saying that a person with a silly name like SoupSpoon should change it and it would help him assimilate better.
151
Je suis Charlie.
Cependant, je ne suis pas 18C.
51
Soup Spoon funny? So says Dick Hill
32
Same garbage in Canada!
51
proscribed speech…on DrudgeReport today:
18 Oct: RealClimateScience: More On The NOAA Texas Temperature Fraud
http://realclimatescience.com/2016/10/more-on-the-noaa-texas-temperature-fraud/
10
In the past week, due to the efforts of WikiLeaks and journalist James OKeefe III and his Project Veritas, the world (or those peasants sufficiently interested to find out) is keenly aware that the rot, the corruption, the deceit, and the thuggery is pervasive throughout the American Establishment. It is not a situation involving one rotten apple, or even one barrel of rotten apples; the entire orchard is foul and diseased.
Can there be any doubt that Canberra might be equally as corrupt? We already have evidence of Wayne Swine’s daughter conceiving of a plan to sway the votes with a bogus story called Mediscare. We already know the extent to which George Soros influences organisations like “Getup” with loads of money. The corruption in the ABC is becoming worse with propaganda coming out of the program Four Corners. We have the UN declaring that “compact cities” are the answer to the fictitious “climate change”, aka Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 “sustainability”.
It is time to defend the freedoms we cherish before they are dead and gone forever; if it isn’t already too late. 18C is only the tip of a very rotten iceberg.
141
The UN wants “compact cities”, as we are already getting in Australia under “urban consolidation” as it makes the sheeple easier to control.
52
Correct. And if I recall, squishing many people into a small space guarantees rapid spead of any pathogen….coincidence?
40
It certainly increases the levels of violence which, of course, requires a “determined” response by the authorities.
30
I wonder how would the “… otherwise than in private…” be interpreted. What exactly is ‘private’, and what exactly is ‘public’?
31
What exactly is ‘private’, and what exactly is ‘public’?
If you are one of the elite then, of course, ‘private’ is everywhere you are.
Everyone else is always in ‘public’, except when alone in the dunny 2 miles from everyone else, on that desert road at 2 AM …
41
… with the security camera turned off, or covered with a cloth.
20
A beheading threat is OK but a cartoon is not. You can read about it here:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/janet-albrechtsen/why-is-a-beheading-threat-okay-but-a-cartoon-comment-not/news-story/38185022546bd2f6f5b9721532a7be32
81
If you have a low threshold of Political Correctness look away now, and do not look at this link.
Ohio State Violence “Experts”: ‘How does climate affect violence?’ Their “New” Theory Explains All
This link and the view held there are supplied for information only, and must be viewed as private only. This link and its content have nothing to do with this (http://joannenova.com.au) blog site, the blog’s owners, the owner publicly expressed views, or the public views of any commentators on this blog.
71
Article is spot on Jo.
61
It’s no wonder the likes of Hanson and Trump are more popular today than ever before. At least the US has a chance albeit a tiny one to destroy PC if Trump wins but here we don’t have any hope for someone like Trump or Hanson to be PM and provide us the same chance. We are stuffed.
70
All I want to say is,
Nothing else need be said.
101
“the act is reasonably likely, in all the circumstances, to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people;”
As a regularly humiliated cricket and rugby supporter in the UK, does 18C mean that our Australian friends will no longer be able to rib us about losing again?
71
That’s brilliant.
20
If Poms get Strayans ribbing you about Rugby, just point out that the Aussie coach just had the biggest, most childish, most embarrassing dummy-spit that has ever taken place in world sport.
After being humiliated – again – by the Black.
20 minutes to go and Gordon “Baghdad Bob” Bray was braying about how close it was… in the end the Wobble-bees lost by 4 converted tries (and that despite Beauden Barret not being able to kick to save his life, else it would have been closer to 6).
Chieka did one thing for Aussie sport – he made Nick Kyrgios look like an exemplary sportsman by comparison.
I s’pose the last time a sporting mob spat the dummy to that extent was when Jardine found a strategy that halved Bradman’s average. The ACB whined like girls until the rules were changed. Forty years later when they had a couple of decent quicks they had no qualms about targeting the batsman’s head.
World Champs again, cuz; Beldisloe champs again, Bro’; the Wobble-bees turned out to be toenga kāinga (not even worth cooking/the remains of the feast).
My Auntie Meg – captain of the very first Silver Ferns in 1926 – would give me a clip behind the ear for being so ungracious, but I learnt to be ungracious towards defeated teams by spending the last forty-five years in Australia: being a sledger is almost a pre-requisite for becoming “Australianated” – i.e., Aussie citizenship. I keep a foot in each camp though (in case the Wallabies ever get good), in the same way that I’m a cheeky “Pakeha Hori” – I still travel on a beautiful black uruwhenua when I go to see the world.
Ka kite ano, y’all.
[This is off topic but it replies to an interesting question posed by someone so I’m going to approve it.] AZ
00
.
The problem with the cartoon is the Aboriginal policeman on the left hand side.
A cop who acts as though black lives matter throws lefties into confusion.
40
Comment from another Australian cartoonist . . . . .
http://pickeringpost.com/story/the-left-has-finally-got-its-grubby-hands-on-cartoons/6552
81
What goes around
comes around in
the long war between
open and closed societies,
one messy-innovative,
no guarantees, the other
top-down divine-right
of kings and bureaucracies,
we’ll tell you what to think
and what you can say.’
-The Inquisition UN, 18c,
Human Rights’ Commission
closet imitation
of Goebbel’s messaging
and stifling of free speech
41
So Bill Leak can’t highlight genuine problems because racism but SBS can air an entire series that parodies a white socioeconomic group because deserving guilt.
121
Rest assured they don’t suffer from cognitive dissonance at SBS.
41
18 Oct: Daily Caller: Chris White: LEAKED: Podesta Used Big Money To Foment Student Revolt Against Obama Critic
Democratic operative John Podesta asked a billionaire environmentalist to foment a student-led revolt against a professor opposing the Obama administration’s climate rules, according to leaked emails published Tuesday.
The campaign chairman for Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton requested billionaire Tom Steyer ask an environmentalist academic friend to stoke a revolt against law professor Laurence Tribe, who was one of President Barack Obama’s mentors at Harvard University…
“Can you get your pall McKibben to organize Harvard student protests against him,” Podesta wrote (LINK), referring to Steyer’s relationship to anti-fossil fuel environmentalist, Bill McKibben. “I’m all for academic freedom when it’s not bought and paid for by Peabody Coal.”
Tribe represented coal producer Peabody Energy in its court battle against the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan. He called the new rules unconstitutional in 2014. Tribe has been a virulent critic of Obama’s climate rules, and has testified before Congress against the climate regulations…
Steyer told Podesta that he was “on it,” telling Clinton’s confidant that he “will try” to get McKibben to use his student network to send Tribe a message…
http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/18/leaked-podesta-used-big-money-to-foment-student-revolt-against-obama-critic/
31
I’m pretty sure weepy bill has been arrested at least once….
10
The entire point of the law, of the constitution, in the US is to allow even the most egregious offender (alleged) to have a defense, a defense council, and a trial. To me this is a basic right, something all peoples should have. Those in the law who hold to the idea of Constitutional Rights, to the Rule of Law, will defend even the nastiest s.o.b. (person or corporation) if those rights are being stripped, have been stripped, or could be. To do otherwise is a denial of the Rule of Law, of the Constitutional Rights we -all- (in the USA) expect and demand for ourselves – and should understand are equally important for others to have.
Attacking someone for performing their duty to the law and constitution is egregious and shameful. Conspiring to have that person attacked is worse, and could be considered the action of a coward or a desire to get in a shot below the belt without being seen. It’s cheating. It’s wrong. And it may be illegal.
I am disgusted with the games that are played by people who feel skirting the basic rights of fellow citizens, who think nothing of punishing a member of the legal profession for performing their legal duty, is an acceptable practice – and using naïve, immature and easily swayed students to do the dirty work is a surefire way to earn a place at the very lowest circle of hell. Should there actually be such a place.
10
Good to see Steyn writing again. He has been away too long. His book, “Lights Out” goes right to the centre of the authoritarian attempt to kill free speech.
41
As, in more sinister way, does the author of the wordless red thumb, who is, I assume, registering a vote against free speech.
I recently read Tom Wolfe’s “Kingdom of Speech“. I think it may have been an article or comment here that put me on to it. What struck me most of all was how utterly intolerant Noam Chomsky and his acolytes are of criticism. When, on the basis of sound field research into linguistics, someone dares to contradict Chomsky (who has never done field research in his entire career), the research is rejected without comment and the offending author is referred to merely as “It”.
Regulars here won’t need any prompting from me, to suggest which other American pseudo-academics behave in exactly the same way. The red-thumb treatment here is very silly and pretty harmless, but, when the owner of the red thumb gets to decide on matters of academic tenure, or of publication, or even of incarceration, that’s a lot more serious.
Cue the Red Thumb of Death (which, of course, it actually was, in Ancient Rome).
51
Here’s the missing “a”.
40
You obviously don’t realise, Red-Thumb Boy, that not giving me a red thumb would have been far wittier.
20
fighting back:
MSM – apart from Hannity(Fox) – may be ignoring the vids, but O’Keefe gets a second scalp today from Video 1: Clinton Campaign and DNC Incite Violence at Trump Rallies. (Scott Foval, National Field Director of Americans United for Change, was fired yesterday)
Twitter: James O’Keefe (Project Veritas)
BREAKING: BOB CREAMER FIRED (pat – or resigned? see his letter)
https://twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/788484460652167168
DiscoverTheNetworks.org: Robert Creamer
Born in 1948, Robert Creamer is the husband of Democrat Rep. Jan Schakowsky. He formerly served as executive director of the Illinois Public Action Fund (where his wife was the program director), and subsequently as a leader of Citizen Action/Illinois. He was also a lobbyist for George Soros’s Open Society Institute. Today Creamer heads the Strategic Consulting Group, a political consultancy whose list of clients includes ACORN, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the AFL-CIO, the United Steelworkers Union of America, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, and dozens of other leftist or Democratic Party state organizations…
While incarcerated — or on “forced sabbatical,” as he called it — Creamer wrote a 628-page political manual titled Stand Up Straight! How Progressives Can Win (published in 2007). In the Acknowledgements section of the book, Creamer stated that his political views had been deeply influenced by “the legendary community organizer” Saul Alinsky…
Stand Up Straight! was endorsed by a number of leading Democrats and their political allies, including… SEIU president Andrew Stern, who said the book would “hopefully inspire more people to act”; political strategist David Axelrod, who said it “provides a blueprint for future victories”; Democrat operative John Podesta, who called the book a “straight-up shot in the arm for progressives”; political commentator Arianna Huffington, who said it would help “return America to its progressive roots”…
In 2008 Creamer worked for the Obama presidential campaign, training volunteers at “Camp Obama.”
Today Creamer writes periodically for the Huffington Post…
Creamer’s Involvement in Provoking Violence at Republican Political Events
In October 2016, investigative journalist James O’Keefe’s “Project Veritas” released a series of undercover, hidden-camera videos showing that Creamer was a leading orchestrator of an initiative where the Democratic Party and the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign had been using trained provocateurs to instigate violence and chaos at Republican events nationwide – especially at rallies for then-presidential candidate Donald Trump and vice-presidential candidate Mike Pence – throughout that year’s election cycle…
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2438
Creamer has scores of articles listed under his name ar HuffPo.
lol:
HuffPo: Scott Foval
Since 2003, Scott has contributed to The Huffington Post, Chicago Pride, Wisconsin Gazette, and other independent media outlets.
During the 2008 U.S. Presidential Election cycle he reported about alleged voter suppression tactics in Midwestern battleground states for The Huffington Post’s OffTheBus campaign news site and his blog ScottsBigMouth.com, and polling place administrator training in Chicago and Cook county for Huffington Post’s Chicago news site…
31
Back in the 80s I used to do maintenance work on the luxury premises of the HRC in the Amex Tower. (Security entry key contained a reference to a certain Labor god.) The first time out, the building manager warned me I might weep when I saw where my tax dollars were going. He was right. The activity in that place was like one of those make-work road crews, but the surroundings were High-1980s Posh.
Yet these loafers, posturers and show ponies were convinced they could be making more money “in the private sector” but for their high ideals. Truly they did nothing – though one of them confided that working with certain ethnic types was a real strain!
Like I’ve said before, never trust an institution with a name right out of a 1950s Superman comic.
71
18 Oct: TheRightScoop: WATCH: New BOMBSHELL video just released by James O’Keefe on MASS VOTER FRAUD
3,739 COMMENTS SO FAR
In the second video of James O’Keefe’s new explosive series on the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign, Democratic party operatives tell us how to successfully commit voter fraud on a massive scale. Scott Foval, who has since been fired, admits that the Democrats have been rigging elections for fifty years.
http://therightscoop.com/watch-new-bombshell-video-just-released-james-okeefe-mass-voter-fraud/
30
Hi Jo,
I don’t understand why these few basic facts are not more widely known??!!??
1. The main people who seem to defend section 18c are very self-righteous. (Some a bit less forgiving than myself would allege they have a “God Complex”!)
2. The main people who seem to want to uphold section 18c seem to have a very high likely-hood of being aggressive and intemperate and rude in a lot of what they say.
3. These people also seem to have very little (if any) interest in addressing the root-cause of many problems that are related to the topic (eg. reducing domestic violence or sexual abuse in aboriginal communities).
Its quite easy to start to see a common theme developing!!
People who insist 18c is a good thing are those that seem more interested in appearing to do the right thing for their fellow man, than actually doing the right thing!!
The sooner the silent majority find their voice, the better this country will be.
Please please WAKE UP AUSTRALIA!!
Warm regards from reformed warmist of logan!!
50
Some thoughts that are used in debate,
May fall foul of an arm of the state,
And one can’t, by the way,
Suggest thoughts we can’t say,
As to do so invites a court date.
110
If this marxist/totalitarian state control is not well deservedly put to the sword, it won’t be long before they come for you in the dark of the night!
Appeasement = surrender to slavery.
Time to wake up Australia.
Hansen for PM
The Donald for Pres, Hitlery for Jail!
First step for true freedom is the abolition of taxpayer funded propaganda monstrosities such as our very own AlpgreensBC and SBS.
The leftoids and inner city ratbags can finance their propaganda with only their own money or get a job at Fairfax, Guardian etc…(the kookoo papers).
Time for the Tail to stop wagging the Dog! Enough of the minority ratbags!
40
This cartoon, based on reality, got the cartoonist fired and an apology from the newspaper.
http://www.imediaethics.org/anti-semitism-at-sydney-morning-herald-gaza-cartoon-retracted/
Fuss over this one, based on dubious claims, but no apology, no firing, and no invocation of 18c.
https://www.crikey.com.au/2014/08/04/critics-fail-to-see-the-funny-side-of-smh-and-oz-gaza-cartoons/
40
Most [snip 18c] are not terrorists, but most terrorists are [snip 18c].
——
[Pathetic this censorship eh? – Jo]
10
Yes, thanks!
10
I quite understand Jo not wanting to republish Bill Leak’s cartoon here, but it is being republished constantly by the Australian (in Mark Steyn’s article today) and in Andrew Bolt’s blog, if anyone wants to see it. Kind off “up you – Commissar Tim” I suspect.
80
Hmmm, real-live “Thought Police”.
70
how many Aussies in attendance, I wonder!
18 Oct: Guardian ***Cities: The world is in Quito to discuss cities – but are local voices heard at Habitat III?
As many as 45,000 people are gathered in Ecuador’s capital for the UN’s future of cities summit. Inside the fence, speakers say greater inclusivity will make better cities for all – but elsewhere in Quito, some residents are feeling shut out
(Guardian ***Cities is sponsored The Rockefeller Foundation)
by Francesca Perry and Mike Herd in Quito
As many as 45,000 delegates – including at least 200 city mayors, 140 national delegations, plus many of the world’s leading academics, architects and urbanist thinkers – are gathered here to discuss how to make cities more “sustainable, inclusive and resilient”, to quote three of the conference’s favourite buzzwords…
Like a giant Post-it note to attendees of the conference, one of the Habitat III billboards around the site’s perimeter states, “INCLUSIVE CITIES”. The impact of this sign is, however, lessened by the fact it is attached to a wire security fence which rings Habitat III’s park campus.
For the duration of the conference, inside the fence is officially United Nations territory, with UN laws superseding those of the host country outside. The feeling of separation is exacerbated by the many road closures and heavy police presence in the surrounding blocks…
Unlike the UN’s 2015 Paris climate change agreement – which created a ***legally binding commitment to restrict member states’ carbon emissions – there is nothing strictly enforceable in the New Urban Agenda. Instead it is a 23-page theoretical (some have said “utopian”) wishlist of what makes for better cities, based on the research and inputs of a global collection of academics and other urban experts – which were then haggled over until the final draft was agreed in New York on 10 September…
Habitat III is the global swansong of Ban Ki-moon…
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/oct/18/world-quito-ecuador-future-cities-local-voices-habitat-3
they care.
17 Oct: Yahoo: Thomson ReutersFoundation: Paola Totaro: City mayors create ‘global parliament’ to manage urbanisation
QUITO, Ecuador (Thomson Reuters Foundation) – More than 60 mayors from around the world have joined forces to create an alliance dubbed a ‘global parliament’ to demand a more powerful role in the management of city growth and urbanisation.
Speaking on the eve of the United Nations Habitat III conference in Quito, Ecuador, on Sunday, the mayors outlined a united vision in which local government would lead the global response to rising urbanisation.
They said collaboration rather than competition would help them address the most urgent challenges for the world’s cities, from affordable housing and transport to CLIMATE CHANGE, migration and refugees…
The mayoral group met in The Hague last month to launch a Global Parliament of Mayors (GPM).
The idea is the brainchild of political scientist Benjamin Barber. In his book “If Mayors Ruled the World”, Barber argues that mayors are pragmatic officials driven by the need to problem-solve at local level…
https://ca.news.yahoo.com/city-mayors-create-global-parliament-manage-urbanisation-125429274.html
20
Many Australians know about the Human Rights & Equal Opportunities Commission but have no understanding of how it operates. If a person or business is deemed to be in breach of a HREOC regulation and if the Commission cannot stand over the alleged offender and extract an apology and a fine they could refer the target to their Tribunal. It is not a court of law and it’s decisions are therefore unenforceable unless a court of law agrees to enforce the decision of the Tribunal. Two organisations that have refused to comply with the Tribunal were Qantas and the Qld Labor Government of a few years past. And both got away with it.
My personal experience was when a former employee who had taken maternity leave returned to work and within a year decided to leave. Not long afterwards a HREOC “Investigator-Conciliator” phoned to ask me (the MD) to attend her office in the city, and when I suggested that she visit me at my office in the suburbs she was quite put out, but reluctantly agreed. During our meeting (I had our female Finance Manager attend the meeting) she outlined the complainants claim that she had been passed over for a promotion offered to her by her department manager (manufacturing) to fill a vacancy in the sales office for internal sales manager. I pointed out that the Manufacturing Manager did not have the authority to appoint sales personnel, but the HREOC Investigator-Conciliator would not listen. I also pointed out tabling records that the job was already filled at the time the complainant claims she was offered the job. This made no difference. The I-C wanted me to agree to meet the complainant for a conciliation session.
Our legal advisors had earlier warned me that HREOC wants positive results and that to not waste time I should make a settlement offer, say $5,000.00 cash. But I ignored that advice and firmly pointed out that the complaint was clearly a mischief making exercise and attempt to gain money. The I-C threatened to take the matter to the Tribunal and I suggested that she should proceed down that path if she was so sure of obtaining a favourable decision based on the evidence we had produced that effectively disproved the claim.
Some months passed and we received a letter from the Commissioner responsible advising that the complainant had withdrawn her complaint and therefore HREOC did not intend to proceed to the Tribunal stage.
There is more to the story, the I-C was not impressed with my “attitude” and lack of cooperation, and that I had a female manager at my side. She returned a week later with a man from the HREOC who did look rather uncomfortable when he met the two people with “attitude” that his colleague had no doubt described as Attila The Hun and Partner. She being a recently graduated Bachelor of Laws, and proud of it, who knew all about businesses because her father was a businessman.
In mu opinion the HREOC is a waste of taxpayer’s monies, makes a mockery of justice and the politicians who support it need to reality check, if not psychiatric help. Commissions like Climate Change too duplicate government departments and the legal system.
I am aware of many other Australians who would like our political representatives to stop playing political games with out money and manage our affairs in a businesslike manner. They pay themselves way out of sync with the private sector and act like our masters. And they seem not to care about the excessive number of public servants who do not contribute real tax (they return some of what private sector taxpayers provide in revenue to governments) and many of whom act like handbrakes on the economy of this nation.
81
Be clear about Section 18C of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1975, both were Labor government legislation and union movement controlled Labor will not agree to repeal 18C. As the Abbott led Coalition government discovered when they decided to enact repeal legislation. A heated debate between Senators Brandis and Wong resulted in a stalemate, Labor Greens & Others in the hostile Senate said no.
They were supported by lobby groups that included all of the churches, human rights, civil libertarians and even some Labor state premiers. To not waste more time on an exercise in futility the Abbott Government moved on and decided not to proceed to the Senate at that time. They had much more pressing legislation on hand including strengthening anti-terrorism laws and needed Senate support.
Until there is a supportive Senate in Canberra I doubt that Section 18C can be changed.
41
Composition of the Oz Federal Senate:
Coalition 30, Labor 26, Greens 9. One Nation 4, Xenaphon 3,
Lib Democrats 1. Family First 1. Jacqui Lambi 1, Derryn Hinch 1.
20
To be honest, there are always ratbag elements within australia.
If general society gets told it has to clam up through more stuff like 18C, I genuinely fear for the well being of the politicians precieved to be the cause of draconian legislation that stifles free speech.
One thing that is becoming clear, is that the fringe element is becoming bolder. I dont in any way condone violence or unlawful behaviour, I do see a day when we may see violence though….once people have all other avenues cut off, violence will be the only outlet available.
I guess thats why the police have become para-military now…they knew this was coming….
10
Anti-Discrimination Act 1975 .. addition of Section 18C during the late 1980s or early 1990s as I recall the timing, and Labor are responsible.
Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act makes it unlawful for someone to do an act that is reasonably likely to “offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate” someone because of their race or ethnicity.
20
The Australian
REBECCA PUDDY
Wind farms were the first domino to fall in a cascade of errors that led to a statewide blackout in SA, report finds.
…… by the way there were more blackouts in SA last night.
61
#SARenewablesFail
20
Don’t jump to conclusions about wind turbines, renewable energy being unreliable, the SA storm related statewide power failure was just a software related event;
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-19/sa-weather-safety-settings-caused-wind-farms-to-fail-blackout/7945450
41
It’s great to know there is no real problem with renewables then…
40
DO NOT LOOK AT THE SMALL MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN!!!!!!!!!!!
40
Isn’t that a case for not meeting contracted performance and hence fines for resulting damages?
I wonder if all of the affected wind farms will be able to produce updated settings that won’t void warranty agreements for the turbines yet meet the required standards?
https://www.aemo.com.au/Media-Centre/-/media/9027D5FB69294D408E4089249F38A36D.ashx
30
If “humiliate” is not also removed from 18C then I suspect complaints will simply switch to “I’ve been humiliated.”
30
Being not from AU, I don’t understand much of this. However, …
It might be helpful if someone lists all those who think the law (18C) is a good thing.
Then, in a rapid manner, accuse each of them of numerous violations of the law. It ought not be too hard to find something(s) that Commissar Soutphommasane has said or written that offends or insults. Most people seeking votes usually say things insulting to others — Just look at Hillary’s comment about the “deplorables.” [USA, I know, but don’t your politicians say nasty things?] Likewise with editorials in newspapers — frequently offensive.
Set about swamping the HRC and the people that support it with many cases.
Sorry if I misunderstand the issue.
61
Imagine a young Sydney couple with child who have set their sights on buying a cottage, but the properties always sell well above what was expected.
They eventually lose their rag and at an auction and offend, insult and humiliate a particular group of people, then they are breaking the law.
Of course this drama doesn’t happen, everyone accepts the situation, it is what it is. There is this elephant in the room and its crushing the battlers, but the free market rules.
Hope this has been of some help.
10
Politifact’s daily Trump attack:
Trump said Hillary Clinton was “let off the hook” for her email scandal while Gen. David Petraeus had his life “destroyed for doing far, far less”, so Politifact takes the word of trusty FBI Director Comey to prove he’s totally wrong!
18 Oct: Politifact: FBI director James Comey says Donald Trump has it flipped; Petraeus case was worse than Clinton’s
By C. Eugene Emery Jr.
WHILE ON THE PAGE, VIDEO AUTOMATICALLY POPS UP MOCKING TRUMP ON ANOTHER ISSUE, FOLLOWED BY VIDEO MOCKING TRUMP VP MIKE NOMINEE MIKE PENCE & PROBABLY MORE
Politifact Gives Trump ‘Pants on Fire’ Rating for Claims of Mass Voter Fraud
Mediaite-14 hours ago
following: Fox’s Steve Doocy wrongly responds with “two million”, while Adams tries to signal it’s FOUR:
18 Oct: VIDEO: 2mins11secs: Fox News: Election Expert: There Are 4 Million Dead People on US Voter Rolls
J. Christian Adams, election lawyer: it’s something this administration does not want to do anything about. They must like it. Now we have four million, four million Steve, ineligible and dead voters on American voter rolls according to the Pew Charitable Trust.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=11&v=CHqlUrdEGwU
i won’t bother to list all the States where voter fraud has already been discovered in recent days;
instead, let’s look at who funds Politifact?
14 Jan: Politifact: New grant will help PolitiFact grow
By Angie Drobnic Holan
The Democracy Fund will invest up to $500,000 over two years in PolitiFact to expand its fact-checking efforts, the two organizations announced Thursday.
The additional funding will be used by PolitiFact to support its staff of reporters and researchers.
“PolitiFact has been helping voters separate fact from fiction in political speech since 2007, publishing more than 11,500 on our Truth-O-Meter. Our mission is simple: to provide ***NONPARTISAN, in-depth analysis of statements and claims framing the political discussion…
The Democracy Fund was created in 2011 by eBay Founder Pierre Omidyar as an initiative of Omidyar Network…
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/jan/14/new-grant-will-help-politifact-grow/
24 April: CenterForPublicIntegrity: Pierre Omidyar gives $100,000 to new anti-Trump super PAC
Billionaire eBay founder backing effort against Republican presidential front-runner
Billlionaire eBay founder Pierre Omidyar is donating $100,000 to NeverTrump PAC, a fledgling super PAC that registered with the Federal Election Commission on March 4…
Omidyar confirmed the donation via Twitter: “I think Trumpism is dangerous,” he wrote. “So I’m personally supporting @NeverTrumpPAC, a rare political contribution during extreme times.”…
Omidyar’s dislike for Trump is no secret. He has made his antipathy toward the candidate clear on Twitter.
“I can’t be contrarian about Donald Trump anymore,” he tweeted on March 13, quoting a Vox story, as Trump blamed Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders for violence at Trump rallies. “He’s terrifying.”
“Trump is a dangerous authoritarian demagogue,” Omidyar wrote in one tweet a few days later.
“Endorsing Donald Trump immediately disqualifies you from any position of public trust,” he wrote in another…
He has also called Trump a “bigot” and a “thin-skinned,” “scaredy-cat” with “no spine.”
https://www.publicintegrity.org/2016/04/15/19564/pierre-omidyar-gives-100000-new-anti-trump-super-pac
Politifact: Donald Trump’s file
True 4%
Mostly True: 11%
Half True: 13%
Total 28%
Politifact: Hillary Clinton file
True 24%
Mostly True: 27%
Half True: 21%
Total: 72%
10
17 Oct: NYT: For Clinton and Trump, There’s Little Debating a Climate Change Divide
By JOHN SCHWARTZ and TATIANA SCHLOSSBERG (Julia Simon contributed reporting)
The third presidential debate, scheduled for Wednesday, might seem like a rerun…
Notably missing is any mention of climate change, which was also almost ignored in the earlier debates…
Michael D. McCurry, a chairman of the Commission on Presidential Debates, said that the moderator and the candidates, not the commission, set the content…
This lack of attention might lead some observers to conclude that Americans are unconcerned about climate change, but some surveys tell another story. Most Americans say they are interested in climate change, but they just do not hear much about it.
(HUH???)In some ways, this presidential election cycle has brought climate change closer to the forefront than any previous election, and the two campaigns could not provide a more stark contrast…
Anthony Leiserowitz, a research scientist at the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Sciences and the director of the climate change communication program there, referred to the lack of attention to the issue as an example of “the spiral of silence,” a term borrowed from Elisabeth Noelle-Neuman, a German political scientist.
“When nobody talks about the issue, the clear signal is that this isn’t very important,” Dr. Leiserowitz said. “Ultimately, it comes down to one of the most precious resources on the planet, human attention.”
He also said that when public figures such as President Obama, Pope Francis and Leonardo DiCaprio talked about climate change, it could influence how much the public says they care about climate change, how often they search on Google about the topic or post on social media…
Lester Holt, the NBC anchor who moderated the first debate, did plan to ask about climate change, according to Mark Kornblau, a senior vice president for communications for NBC News and MSNBC. He dropped it, Mr. Kornblau said, because “the early part of the debate ran longer than we had hoped, because there were more interruptions and soliloquies than we expected.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/18/science/hillary-cinton-donald-trump-global-warming.html?smid=tw-share&_r=
panic stations at Grist:
17 Oct: Grist: Grist Exclusive: In wake of Wikileaks, Clinton’s campaign chair seeks to reassure climate activists
By Ben Adler
In an exclusive interview with Grist conducted as revelations were still pouring out last week, Podesta sought to assure climate hawks of the sincerity of Hillary Clinton’s commitment to fighting climate change. “She’s put out an extremely robust agenda that goes beyond what President Obama has pledged,” he told Grist (the interview was scheduled before the first of the Wikileaks releases and not in response to them).
“These are big, bold plans,” Podesta said. “It would exceed the goals that the United States took on in the Paris negotiations.”…
But there are details that look bad, too, such as an account that came out over the weekend of Clinton saying that she’s “at odds with the most organized and wildest” of the environmental movement — those who want to keep all fossil fuels in the ground — and that they should “get a life.”…
“I don’t think we have reached the limit of executive action,” he (Podesta) said…
Donald Trump, of course, has suggested climate change is a Chinese hoax and threatened to “cancel” the Paris agreement. Podesta said that ***Clinton plans to keep using these words against him in the last three weeks of the campaign. Bottom line, he said: “We’re running against a guy who is denying climate change.”
http://grist.org/politics/in-wake-of-wikileaks-clintons-campaign-chair-seeks-to-reassure-climate-activists/
***doubt she will…because doing so would boost Trump’s numbers.
10
following opinion piece is presumably written by Fred Barnes, given this video is at top!
VIDEO CAPTION: The Weekly Standard Executive Editor Fred Barnes on Patrick Kennedy’s effort to influence the FBI classification of Hillary Clinton’s emails.
18 Oct: WSJ: Hillary’s State Assist
The email classification fight was not about routine procedures
The latest FBI document release on Monday contains interviews with officials revealing that in spring 2015 Undersecretary of State Patrick Kennedy contacted an FBI official to coax the FBI to downgrade from classified to unclassified a Benghazi-related email that had sat on Mrs. Clinton’s server. At the time Mrs. Clinton was still insisting she’d never transmitted classified information.
The headlines have focused on whether the Kennedy request to FBI official Brian McCauley was a quid pro quo: an offer that State would allow the FBI to place more agents in foreign countries, in exchange for downgrading the document…
The FBI also did not downgrade the document. Yet even the FBI concedes it referred the “allegations” to “appropriate officials for review,” which makes the episode ripe for Congressional investigation.
Even without a quid quo pro, the episode shows that the State Department has been assisting the Clinton campaign. Especially notable is evidence that Mr. Kennedy knew the FBI had grounds for classifying the document…
Mr. Kennedy proposed that rather than mark the email classified, he’d give it a special exemption from Freedom of Information Act requests, which would allow him “to archive the document in the basement of [State] never to be seen again.” Mr. Kennedy seemed to agree that the email was too sensitive for public consumption but wanted to spare Mrs. Clinton the classified reality…
The employee also noted that the process was dictated by what State employees referred to as the “Shadow Government,” a “powerful group of very high-ranking STATE officials” who met every Wednesday to deal with “everything CLINTON-related.”
***The group included State lawyers Catherine Duval and Austin Evers, who previously worked for Williams & Connolly—the law firm of Mrs. Clinton’s lawyer, David Kendall. Ms. Duval was last in the spotlight when she was at the IRS, stymieing Congressional attempts to obtain emails related to the abusive targeting of conservative nonprofits…
Speaking of the White House, the latest WikiLeaks release contains an email from Clinton aide Phillipe Reines to campaign staffers in March 2015. Mr. Reines is responding to a New York Times headline, “Obama Says He Didn’t Know Hillary Clinton Was Using Private Email Address.” “One of us should connect with the WH just so they know that the email will show his statement to not make sense,” he wrote.
This is the latest evidence that Mr. Obama was aware of, and corresponded with, Mrs. Clinton on her private email server…
Notes of an FBI interview with Huma Abedin describe how the Clinton aide was shown an email that the FBI suggests came to Mrs. Clinton under a pseudonym used by Mr. Obama, and she exclaims, “How is this not classified?” She then asks for a copy of the email.
The American public still doesn’t know who knew about Mrs. Clinton’s server, who misused it and how much that put the nation’s secrets at risk. We do know that many Obama officials and bureaucrats have been dedicated to making sure the public never gets those answers.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/hillarys-state-assist-1476832442
this pooh poohs the theory posted on earlier thread that “7th floor group” might refer to Soros’s Open Society Foundation office in London’s Millbank:
Wikipedia: 7th Floor Group
The 7th Floor Group refers to a powerful group of high-ranking US State Department officials, recently revealed in an FBI investigation report of the Hillary Clinton email controversy. FBI documents further state that the 7th Floor Group acts as a type of shadow government inside the State Department…
***Hillary Clinton’s office was located on the 7th Floor of the US State Department Headquarters, where she met with her top advisers, Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills, and others…
The Secretary’s suite was a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF), which also had a DSS security detachment outside the office. Currently, the 7th Floor Group meets on Wednesdays, which includes Secretary of State John Kerry, Deputy Chief of Staff Jennifer Tout, Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Heather Higginbottom, Under Secretary for Management Patrick F. Kennedy, Assistant Secretary of State Julia Frifield, and members of the Office of the Legal Adviser.
Origins of the name
The 7th floor refers to the 7th floor of the Harry S Truman Building in Washington, DC, which acts as the office building for the US State Department, and contains a 7th floor that has no windows.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7th_floor_group
10
Just heard that the British have invaded the Ecuadorian Embassy, and have Assange in custody
Seem Hitlery Clinton’s reach against WikiLeaks is a long arm !!
https://nationonenews.com/2016/10/17/breaking-julian-assange-in-the-custody-of-uk-officials-black-sack-over-his-head-as-taken-out-of-ecuadorian-embassy-d-notices-given-no-photos/
32
This is a false flag story, I think.
10
I went to this link and found it infected, don’t follow it especially on an Android device
10
Not all 18C enforcers are communists, but all communists are 18C enforcers.
50
Dean
Obvious. But not many communists believe in democratic freedoms. About zero, in fact.
The central themes at this site seems to be those of liberty and logic. Please feel free to disagree if you have a good argument.
Cheers
Speedy.
10
Hmmm … another warmist evah.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/september-2016-warmest-recorded/story?id=42878806
As you all know 1878 was warmer, but that’s an inconvenient truth and won’t become evident for a couple of years.
31
Jo,
Please delete if you believe this threatens you or your site with any legal action. Do not concern yourself with any affect on me, however.
THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED BELOW ARE THOSE OF THE AUTHOR AND SHOULD NOT BE ATTRIBUTED IN ANY WAY TO OWNER OF THIS SITE.
18C as currently written is a threat to freedom of expression and the Australian way of life – period.
NO-ONE HAS THE RIGHT TO NOT BE OFFENDED.
If you truly believe that someones opinion on any matter is stupid and wrong, don’t tell them to shut up, quote them widely and often! If the majority believe the same as you, your opponent will be laughed at, and such supporters as they have will slink away and likely disown that they ever supported this “wrong” opinion.
If I wish to make clear what is inarguably the case – ie, that Aboriginal people are over-represented in domestic violence cases – with a view to easing the suffering of that group, this is no more racist than those despicable individuals who claim that as I am not Aboriginal, I do not understand what it’s like. No, I don’t – and neither do you understand how heart-rending it is to see the money wasted in a vein attempt to placate the noisy minority, most especially when it has made no difference! Aboriginal people have had around 30 years of “self determination” and if anything, they have made their own kind suffer even more. This is completely unacceptable and cannot continue.
I am a white, single, male, heterosexual of over 50 years, I have worked from the age of 16, never claimed a centrelink payment of any sort, and always paid my taxes. I have friends from many backgrounds – black, white, yellow, brown, european, asian, american and so on. I do not care what the colour of your skin is, where you or your ancestors were born, what your sexual preferences are, or how or what (if at all) you chose to worship, except in so far as it affects me and my ability to go about my legal business and otherwise live my life. I ask no more than the same from everyone else with regards to my behavior. This is, I believe, the essence of not being discriminatory.
You are welcome to poke fun at my actions and beliefs, and I will gladly return the favour. This “larikanism” is the heart and soul of what it means to be Australian and I strenuously object to being told what I can and cannot say regarding my opinion of others. I regularly call one of my Lebonese friends “skippy poof” and he responds by calling me a “lebbo bastard” – we both have a good laugh about it and we both enjoy the shocked looks of those who haven’t previously witnessed it, whatever their race etc.
20
Kneel
I suppose all those gentle souls with “FOCK TONY ABBOTT” Tee Shirts wouldn’t be easily offended, of course?
Unless that sensitivity was selectively applied, of course…
Cheers,
Speedy
20
I kept reading this article, and seeing “HRC” everywhere, and could not figure it out. Why is Australia upset with “HRC”? Other than the obvious, of course.
Then I realized: HRC = Human Rights Commission (love the way the left always names something opposite to what it actually is; e.g. “Affordable Care Act”)
HRC = Hillary Rodham Clinton
It seems logical that HRC will spawn an HRC at some point.
God be with us all … … …
Vlad
40
Email Attorney General Senator Brandis and your local member:
‘[email protected]’ (You can find your local member’s email address on the http://www.aph.gov.au website)
From the Liberal Party website http://www.liberal.org.au/our-beliefs :
We Believe:
In the inalienable rights and freedoms of all peoples; and we work towards a lean government that minimises interference in our daily lives; and maximises individual and private sector initiative.
In those most basic freedoms of parliamentary democracy – the freedom of thought, worship, speech and association.
In short, we simply believe in individual freedom and free enterprise; and if you share this belief, then ours is the Party for you.
Stand up and be counted. Support QUT students, support Bill Leak. The thought police on the HRC need to be forced to stop their witch hunts.
You have the power to restore freedom of speech. Abolish 18c.
Act NOW.
30
Don’t make me laugh, the Liberal Party do not believe in free speech, free enterprise or individual freedom. Like Labor they surround these freedoms with restrictive legislation in reaction to pressure groups or their donors.
20
Bill’s not taking it lying down! See his cartoon in today’s (20th Oct) Oz.
30
Human Right’s Commission = platform for overpaid leftoids creating an income for themselves by the propagation of witch hunts, much like the CAGW self proclaimed ‘authorities'(remember to stand up straight and stamp your foot when you hear the word ‘authority’)
The enforcement of the will of ‘the state’ under the guise that this/these new decrees are good for you.
Our role is not to question why, but to do as we are told by these ‘high moral, self proclaimed esteemed ones’…..or in plain language, those that are full of BS and as useless as tits on a bull!
I see in Bolt’s blog about a senate questioning of Fuhrer Triggs, a particular quote from her saying:
“I knew I could have responded and destroyed them — I could have said, ‘You’ve asked me a question that demonstrated you have not read our statute. How dare you question what I do?’ ”
‘How dare you question what I do’….. indeed, another of these ratbags that think they are born to hand down tablets from the mount….for today’s indoctrination from yet another tax payer funded marxist/totalitarian indoctrinator on a bloated taxpayer funded income.
40
I must have read it a bit further than you did, though I only glanced.
The story I got was she said: “I knew I could have…..How dare &c” , later denied having said that, then a recording turned up.
20
I won’t shed a tear if Gillian gets rolled for misleading a Senate legal and constitutional affairs committee on Tuesday.
Tim Blair’s “Gillian’s Island”
21
I’m really offended by 18C, can you tell me where I can lodge my complaint?
31
Those agonizing over the words in our human rights legislation and what “free speech” really means should look to the USA, the only country to have a Constitutional right to free speech. Australia does not, nor does England, they fluff along with no clear understanding of what it means, nor are their politicians willing to give up changing the definition according to demands of whatever rabble decide to demand someone’s speech be banned.
Steyn is right about not arguing about some deemed offence to be judged based on some interpretation of vague legislation. It is the legislation that should be argued and rejected unless the supporters can defend it.
The following is the best argument against our current human rights legislation.
Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case based on the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Court held that government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is directed to inciting, and is likely to incite, imminent lawless action.
To understand it properly it is necessary to read the whole judgement, then use it when appearing before any Australian body.
https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/107965/clarence-brandenburg-appellant-v-state-of-ohio/
20
“Steyn points out that some Australians think that there are higher priorities than removing 18C, but I’m with him, all freedoms start with free speech.”
I’ll disagree. All freedoms retained stem from the ability of the people to defend them by force if necessary but usually just by the fear of those that would take them away inspired by the potential use of that force. Thank God for our 2nd amendment.
The fundamental boxes of Liberty are:
The Soap box
The Ballot box’
and the Cartridge box.
The first two can be corrupted. The final one can’t.
40
I should add that firearms sales in the US to private individuals have been at a record pace for most of the time Obama has been president and have spiked in the last five months.
30
Freedom of thought and expression
Something that was fought for not so not many years ago..
00
Perhaps we should ask how the Human Rights Commission has increased the extent of Human Rights in this country?
And to what extent it has decreased it?
And to what extent the taxpayer should continue paying for it, to the betterment of their lives and that of their children?
Or am I being silly???
10