Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Sign Up Now!

Australian news and politics.

Muz said:
Worst analogy ever.

Writer's festivals are known for being 'edgy'. Flower shows, not so much.
Click to expand...
I said that they're going to have an element of politics yet they needn't have it all the time. Besides, the person banned has a pretty weak case with her antics and both sides are squabbling over it. Plenty of her historical posts aren't opinion but rather calling for violence, bit resistance.

Looks like she's been reinstated for next year in a damage control move. It may or may not create attendance issues.
 
tsf said:
"
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has said he is “stunned” by the Coalition’s resistance to the government’s antisemitism response bill after almost a month of demands from the opposition that parliament be recalled early and legislation responding to the Bondi shooting debated.
He condemned the Coalition shortly after Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke spoke on radio slamming the opposition for being hypocritical, as key Coalition figures argue they laws would damage freedom of religious expression and speech if passed in their current form."

"We need to stop hate speech"....but "we actually love hate speech" lol.

Perhaps one of the best bits of all this can of worms that they brought on themselves is jewish leaders worried that versus of the Torah could fall under the laws, and there should be exemptions for hate speech using religious text.

FMD
Click to expand...
I'm not too well read on this but I've seen snippets that use of religious texts would be exempted. You've said parts though so perhaps there are bits commonly misused to incite hate. All very murky though and a law not passing first time is probably a good thing so they can have better look at things.
 
Sharkman84 said:
Labor's hate speech laws on the brink as Coalition raises doubts and Greens reject plan

www.sbs.com.au

Labor's hate speech laws on the brink as Coalition raises doubts and Greens reject plan

With the Coalition and Greens taking a swipe at the bill, questions exist over how the government could pass hate speech reform.
www.sbs.com.au www.sbs.com.au
Click to expand...

This is what you call performative politics - usually done minor parties like the Greens and PHON. That's where the LIBs are now.

When they got the draft bill earlier in the week - we have no time. Now - well before Monday - we can't support it.

In the meantime Albanese constantly is asking for amendments. Neither has proposed any.

Let's re-visit.

The Richardson review due to report quickly was always likely to recommend a Royal Commission. Now the review is included in the Royal Commission. So what is different. Royal Commission pushed by Ley was always political - just back to October 7 2023. i.e all the decisions undertaken by the Liberals would not be looked at. Now Richardson review still only looks back to then but looking at logistical, operational and communication problems. But the rest of the Royal commission can look at the root cause. i.e. hate speech laws, exactly the things Liberals and the Murdochs have fought violently against for years.

So by going hard both the Liberals and Murdoch media have got exactly what they don't want.

The Greens and crossbenchers will make amendments and it will pass easily. Once again the Liberals have dealt themselves out of the decision making.

Then the royal commission will become a de-facto media Royal Commision - exactly what Murdoch doesn't want and something that Albanese was wary of doing - but now he has the cover to do it.

Played like a fiddle.

Then on the gun laws Ley came on today and said we don't even know whether the states will support them, even though National cabinet has net and basically agreed on them already.
 
I'd encourage everyone to read whatever bill is proposed
In my entire life I have never seen the contents of the bill accurately reported in the media (whether left/right/centrist media). I have yet to read through this one, so I don't yet have an opinion
 
patjennings said:
This is what you call performative politics - usually done minor parties like the Greens and PHON. That's where the LIBs are now.

When they got the draft bill earlier in the week - we have no time. Now - well before Monday - we can't support it.

In the meantime Albanese constantly is asking for amendments. Neither has proposed any.

Let's re-visit.

The Richardson review due to report quickly was always likely to recommend a Royal Commission. Now the review is included in the Royal Commission. So what is different. Royal Commission pushed by Ley was always political - just back to October 7 2023. i.e all the decisions undertaken by the Liberals would not be looked at. Now Richardson review still only looks back to then but looking at logistical, operational and communication problems. But the rest of the Royal commission can look at the root cause. i.e. hate speech laws, exactly the things Liberals and the Murdochs have fought violently against for years.

So by going hard both the Liberals and Murdoch media have got exactly what they don't want.

The Greens and crossbenchers will make amendments and it will pass easily. Once again the Liberals have dealt themselves out of the decision making.

Then the royal commission will become a de-facto media Royal Commision - exactly what Murdoch doesn't want and something that Albanese was wary of doing - but now he has the cover to do it.

Played like a fiddle.

Then on the gun laws Ley came on today and said we don't even know whether the states will support them, even though National cabinet has net and basically agreed on them already.
Click to expand...
Bang on.

The gave them just enough rope to gang themselves.

Never mind, the conservative media who was screaming for it is now calling it albanese’s draconian anti- freedom law and painting it as a loss for him.

Clown show. Waste of time and money.

Just like this royal commission into fuck all.
 
I confess to using ai to getting the specific critiques of the bill (limiting myself to cases where a section of the bill is cited). Seems to be something like this

conservative critiques:

1) exemption for religious texts.
2) racial vilification left too vague
3) good faith intent being removed as a legal defence

Green critiques:

1) visa refusal powers
2) banning hate groups without safegaurds/oversight
3) inciting racial hatred laws could ban some pro palestine slogans, doesn't give protection to lgbt or religious groups

Hard left critiques (socialist alternative/red flag)

1) object to the principle of it being criminal to threaten violence
2) object to the police given power to move protests away from places of worship
3) object to the length of the prison sentences

These critiques seem manageable to be honest. I suspect a back and forth happens before the bill passes which is usual. I'll have a read myself when I get the chance
 
grazorblade said:
I confess to using ai to getting the specific critiques of the bill (limiting myself to cases where a section of the bill is cited). Seems to be something like this

conservative critiques:

1) exemption for religious texts.
2) racial vilification left too vague
3) good faith intent being removed as a legal defence

Green critiques:

1) visa refusal powers
2) banning hate groups without safegaurds/oversight
3) inciting racial hatred laws could ban some pro palestine slogans, doesn't give protection to lgbt or religious groups

Hard left critiques (socialist alternative/red flag)

1) object to the principle of it being criminal to threaten violence
2) object to the police given power to move protests away from places of worship
3) object to the length of the prison sentences

These critiques seem manageable to be honest. I suspect a back and forth happens before the bill passes which is usual. I'll have a read myself when I get the chance
Click to expand...
There will be - the problem though is for exemption for religious. The conservatives want the exemptions but only for Torah - Old Testament - not for the Qur'an. You can't discriminate like that, For once I agree with the Greens - though rather than complaining they could just submit amendments to be included before Monday as have been asked for. Hate laws should not only be race hate laws.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Muz
patjennings said:
There will be - the problem though is for exemption for religious. The conservatives want the exemptions but only for Torah - Old Testament - not for the Qur'an. You can't discriminate like that, For once I agree with the Greens - though rather than complaining they could just submit amendments to be included before Monday as have been asked for. Hate laws should not only be race hate laws.
Click to expand...
have they specifically said that they only want an exemption for the Torah?

I'd like to hear from counter intelligence. It makes sense to have a religious text exemption but I imagine if someone read Sahih al-Bukhari 2926 or Leviticus 20:13 over an over that would be a red flag, there is probably a sensible way to construct a compromise

as you say, I'd like to hear ammendments proposed from both parties
 
The irony of wanting a hate speech bill but exemptions for your own hate speech. We are living in a spoof.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Muz
grazorblade said:
have they specifically said that they only want an exemption for the Torah?

I'd like to hear from counter intelligence. It makes sense to have a religious text exemption but I imagine if someone read Sahih al-Bukhari 2926 or Leviticus 20:13 over an over that would be a red flag, there is probably a sensible way to construct a compromise

as you say, I'd like to hear ammendments proposed from both parties
Click to expand...
That's was what the Envoy was wanting and Ley was supporting
 
  • Like
Reactions: Muz
Will guarantee that the first person to be convicted if any of this passes will be a conservative, after they’ve arrested a number of progressives or lefties but couldn’t convict.
 
patjennings said:
That's was what the Envoy was wanting and Ley was supporting
Click to expand...
do you have an exact quote? I tried with ai but couldn't find anything (go easy on me using ai I'm in England and away from oz's daily media cycle :D)

I read the Segel's report which albo approved and it looked pretty sensible. I had a single objection - I think that there should be a mitigating circumstances defense. A palestinian refugee saying obscene things about Jews could be treated with more nuance than the general public, much like you might treat a refugee fleeing persecution from Muslims differently if they say intense or even obscene things about Muslims, or Croatians refugees speaking about Yugoslavians and so on
 
A little tidbit, further...so Australia's most notorious criminal Kaz Hamad, directing murders, 100s of firebombings (including the murder of innocent people), kidnappings, extortion of aussies businesses was basically left alone by police until....


" Hamad’s alleged involvement in ordering the firebombing of the Adass Israel synagogue in Melbourne in December 2024 on behalf of the Iranian government that compelled federal authorities to act."


This is insane. Basically kill who you want, extort everyone, bomb what you want....and the aussie authorities will shrug their shoulders....until.

This is outrageous.
 
tsf said:
A little tidbit, further...so Australia's most notorious criminal Kaz Hamad, directing murders, 100s of firebombings (including the murder of innocent people), kidnappings, extortion of aussies businesses was basically left alone by police until....


" Hamad’s alleged involvement in ordering the firebombing of the Adass Israel synagogue in Melbourne in December 2024 on behalf of the Iranian government that compelled federal authorities to act."


This is insane. Basically kill who you want, extort everyone, bomb what you want....and the aussie authorities will shrug their shoulders....until.

This is outrageous.
Click to expand...

That's an amazing read. Great journalism BTW.

I think the crux of no action, from how I read it at least, was we won't help other countries if the death penalty is involved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tsf
tsf said:
The Australian today:

Hate speech bill will open the door to elected tyranny​

Labor’s hate speech bill risks criminalising opinion, chilling debate and jailing Australians for imagined offence. Rushed after Bondi, it threatens free association and turns democracy into tyranny.

FMD, these are the cunts who were demanding it, and saying it needs to happen immediately. Christ on a bike, you cannot win.
Click to expand...
Your won't be able to say "Christ on a bike" anymore soon.... Of course, Ive never heard of any other religious leaders mocked so openly.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top