The Ant Broadcasting Commission brings you …
Freedom of speech does not only apply to what you want to hear. Are we really going to stand by while we lose the right to laugh at morons and criticise our politicians?
and pray that there's intelligent life somewhere out in space
The Ant Broadcasting Commission brings you …
Freedom of speech does not only apply to what you want to hear. Are we really going to stand by while we lose the right to laugh at morons and criticise our politicians?
The Telegraph apologises …
That’s unlikely to please Mr. Conroy or dampen his enthusiasm for ramming legislation though in just one week. Such haste is something that used to trouble young Conno … from 2006
All this and more at …
The ABC are quite concerned. There was even the suggestion that the photograph had been chosen to make Conroy look dopey. Short of wearing red underpants on his head how could he be made to look dopier than usual?
Truth is though Mr Conroy is trying to do exactly what every dictator does … muzzle his critics.
James Paterson writing in the Australian …
ALL politicians are self-interested. But few are as shameless as Communications Minister Stephen Conroy.
His proposed “media reforms” may be a thinly veiled response to a technologically driven changing media landscape, but we all know their real purpose: to punish and rein in the federal government’s critics in the media…
Conroy has been egged on by Labor backbenchers and the Greens for months about the evils of media companies such as News Limited, publisher of The Australian. Former Greens leader Bob Brown famously dubbed News as part of the “hate media” and called for licensing for newspaper proprietors. Current Greens leader Christine Milne called for a “fit and proper test” so the government could control who invested in the media.
In November 2011 Labor senator Doug Cameron said reporting in News Limited paper The Daily Telegraph that Kevin Rudd might challenge for leadership of the ALP amounted to a “threat to democracy”. Of course, when Rudd did challenge less than six months later, Cameron was among his number-crunchers.
Steve Gibbons, another Labor backbencher, even called for individual journalists to receive fines to improve the “fairness of our media”.
Conroy has finally delivered in spades for the most deranged critics of the media.
When I was a kid it was quite often the case that an Irishman, a Scotsman and an Englishman went into a pub where various stereotypic scenarios led to a punchline. Better a punchline than a punch.
I recall being told the one about the kids at Bondi being menaced by a shark, a man racing into the water and fighting the shark with his bare hands and saving the kids. A passing reporter races up and interviews our intrepid hero who says something like “Cor blimey, guvnor, anyone woulda done it” thereby revealing his cockney origins.
The headline read “Pommy bastard beats into kids pet”.
What would happen these days? Well the pom would get the sack for a start, when the video goes viral, for being on sickleave from his job in Merthyr Tydfil. What, he was Welsh, you say. Well far to many Welsh people here in Australia. Not on a 457 visa I hope. What about his press secretary.
I digress, the reporter in the New Australia would probably get to keep his job, he’d have more sense than to cause offense to visiting heroes in our roxonised society, he’d play a straight bat (Aussie reporters will learn to do that, no need to worry that the art is dying in our cricketers) he would rush in his good news story. The editor would give thanks, something he could report today without falling foul of Conroy’s latest straight jacket.
What are we coming to? Conroy, you will recall wanted to filter the internet, I guess it would slow it all down enough to warrant fibre to the home. Now it’s a press commissar to licence reporters. All because those newspapers that earn a living selling papers and advertising have had the temerity to inform the community that the ALP have cocked up everything they’ve touched, broken every promise that they’ve made whilst led by a backstabbing, lying virago with a very shady past and a treasurer who thinks a surplus is a minus number, and a tax is a saving.
So my message in response is Get Your Hands OFF Freedom of Speech. And get them off my super, as well.
As for our other Welsh would be hero, the shark was a harmless variety and sick, probably dying, the children were in no danger whatever, Sir, you were not only defrauding your employers but attempting to defraud us too. I will be writing to the RSPCA, Hugh Wirth knows what to do with people who molest our sea creatures.
A tax on email, please don’t tell Conroy.
Steve Kates on freedom of speech …
James Allan, Garrick Professor of Law, University of Queensland is on sabbatical at the University of San Diego School of Law and writes …
I tried a little experiment here at my sabbatical university in California. I asked a few members of the law school (from across the political spectrum) to guess which country in the world wanted to: stop speech that offended, insulted or humiliated some people; that for other matters applying to more potential people, just humiliated them; that reversed the onus of proving when this had happened so that the self-proclaimed victim could basically just sit back and force the accused to prove he hadn’t done this (good luck on that); that makes defendants pay their own legal bills, even if they end up winning, and more.
I got guesses ranging from various South American countries through African ones, and on to Singapore and godawful authoritarian countries in Asia and elsewhere. Not a single one of them guessed Australia. It presumably never entered their heads.
When I told them they couldn’t believe it.
As I said, it’s embarrassing being an Australian right now. And what we all need, all of us regardless of our other political views on other issues, is to fight this awful government proposal tooth and nail.
Sure, there’s been a partial backdown. But it’s only partial. And sure, Ms Roxon is now gone. But even what remains is an egregious attack on free speech. Mr. Abbott and the Coalition need to do more than just oppose this bill. They need to promise they will go to a double dissolution election if necessary to rid us of an outrageous mess.
And that cannot be all. For there already exists s.18C of the Racial Discrimination Act and all of that needs to go too, however much certain lobby groups that matter to the Coalition might be opposed to its repeal. This is about a key matter of principle. Mr. Abbott and Mr. Brandis, seeing where complacency on free speech has led us, need to be firm and make it clear that the whole proposed and existing edifice must go.
If anyone complains that that’s an extremist position, you can tell him or her that in California there would still be much more scope for people to speak their minds than in an Australia purged of these odious Nicola Roxon proposals and purged of s.18C. Even then you would be more constrained in what you can say in Australia than anywhere in the US.
The entire article can be read <HERE>.
Wilhelmus Simon Petrus Fortuijn, known as Pim Fortuyn was a Dutch politician, civil servant, sociologist, author and professor who criticised Islam. On 6 May 2002, at age 54, Fortuyn was assassinated.
Theodoor “Theo” van Gogh was a Dutch film director, film producer, columnist, author and actor. His last film was loosely based on the assassination of the Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn. He was shot dead, stabbed and an attempt was made to decapitate him, as he cycled to work 2nd November 2004.
A third Dutchman, Geert Wilders, who lives under police guard, is presently in Australia to tell us why we should fear Islam. Freedom of speech encounters many obstacles. This article is lifted from the Australian …
DEBBIE Robinson measures freedom of speech by the number of hotels and other venues that have agreed, then abruptly refused, to provide a stage for anti-Islamic Dutch MP Geert Wilders on his Australian speaking tour.
As deputy president of the Q Society, the Australian group hosting Mr Wilders in Melbourne, Perth and Sydney this week, Ms Robinson reckons the latest count is about 30. Most cite damage to their reputation, others the potential damage to walls and windows from protesters. “We are afraid we may offend people,” she said. “It is this huge fear factor.”
As recently as Friday night, the venue where Mr Wilders was booked to speak in Melbourne tomorrow night called Ms Robinson to cancel. Another venue has been found but the location will not be announced until 7pm today, 24 hours before the speech.
The Q Society is still trying to find a hotel in Sydney willing to make available a room for a press conference on Friday.
“He is not being allowed to speak freely,” Ms Robinson said. “It is being shut down. Whether you support or whether you differ, to me the big issue is he should be able to speak.”
The Q Society is a firm supporter of most of what Mr Wilders says. It opposes the “Islamisation” of Australia and, like Mr Wilders, it sees Islam primarily as a political ideology rather than a religion, one that is incompatible with liberal democratic traditions and the Judeo-Christian ethic.
The group is frustrated by what it says is the failure of Australian politicians to talk seriously about the threats posted by Islam and the limits that anti-vilification and discrimination laws place on public debate. “Our politicians think it is just another religion; the man on the street thinks it is just another religion,” group spokesman Andrew Horwood said. “When you actually understand it, it is substantially different.”
Julia Gillard yesterday described Mr Wilders’ views as abhorrent. Former immigration minister Chris Bowen, when he granted Mr Wilders a visa in October, said while his views were offensive, Australian society could “withstand the visit of a fringe commentator”.
I think assassination is abhorrent. I think attempts to stifle free speech are abhorrent.
Professor Gillian Triggs is President of the Australian Human Rights Commission, a body that seems to exist only to harvest complaints about discrimination …
Prof. Triggs : … If I may say so, I went to an interesting lecture by the foreign minister the other day to celebrate the Magna Carta, quoting the fundamental principles of the Magna Carta that no man—or presumably woman—can be charged or held without a trial of their peers. It seems extraordinary—
Senator BRANDIS: I do not think the barons at Runnymede had friends like Mr Eddie Obeid and Mr Ian Macdonald, unlike our foreign minister, who speaks with eloquence about the Magna Carta …
Remember Thursday, September 12, 1991 …
The Australian Human Rights Commission is a 100% taxpayer-funded organisation. One of its tasks is to advocate on behalf of Australians’ human rights. On its web page it mentions “discrimination” a bit and of course it mentions “freedom of speech”.
You can gain a quick and dirty notion of its priorities by comparing how often. “Discrimination” is mentioned 12,200 times, “freedom of speech” just 423 times.
And that may not be the oddest thing about their priorities …
Click on the pics to enlarge them if they’re too small to read.
What could be The Most Important Human Rights Issue of all? Fortunately the public can’t be trusted to get that right. They should get Get Up onto the job, get some healthy bias in there.
They have though, created a whole new tax payer funded verb …
We all want to freedom. My word we do …