A week ago today, I attended the memorial for Bill Leak at the Sydney Town Hall.
As I scanned the crowd, an eclectic group of people who had known Bill one way or another, I had to ask where were the Labor people? Where was Shorten, Plibersek or Dreyfus?
In the wake of the 2004 election, with the Howard government enjoying a majority in both houses, there was no opposition in the parliament. For at least two years, the worst part of Coalition MPs’ days was opening up The Australian and flipping to Bill Leak’s cartoon, to see another hilarious lampooning of their leader.
I would have thought some of the Labor people might have made an appearance simply out of gratitude for those dark days. It bothers me they stayed away and it speaks of a faddish clannishness the old Labor people would regard with contempt.
Bill Leak embraced everyone he met. Ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, it didn’t matter. He genuinely enjoyed the company of people but it was more than that. If he spied someone feeling awkward or a bit uncomfortable, Bill would bound up and make a fuss of them. He not only had the ability to make people feel special but he brought a sense of fairness and equity to any table.
It is a politician’s gift but Bill was not on the ballot. He wasn’t trying to sell anything. He simply loved people.
Full column here.
Not content with the mega thrashing she got in the recent US Elections from POTUS Trump we now see Hillary Clinton giving cheek once again as if she thinks she’s back in the running, Mr Insider. Goodness me she was bloody hopeless during the campaign, Trump wiped the floor with her. She may think that with a bit of occasional bad publicity Trump gets from time to time that her time may still “come”. Methinks not , a duds a duds a dud! POTUS Trump is busy protecting the USA and creating local jobs and a damn good job he’s doing too imho despite the crazed lefties trying to put a spanner in the works every chance they get.
http://tinyurl.com/ldhwz73
Trumps rooted Enery . The poo is about to hit the fan. I told you the Russians would fix the election. Now we will see the Vice Pres’ become the POTUS, and the cunning plans of the dingbat Republicans come to fruition.
You could be on to something there my good man – listen to this “exclusive” recording your Uncle Henry has unearthed. Strewth Hillary needs to hear this. Cheers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFUuvOD2G7c
You really are our man in Washington Mr Blofeld. I never miss your articulate, passionate, balanced and informed comments on what is going down in the USofA. I wouldn’t be surprised if your getting your scoops via weekly chats with Melania.
I think it was you who made a very nice comment about me, Milton. I pressed the wrong button, I’m sorry to say and deleted it in error. Thanks anyway.
No worries, Jack.
Bless you dear Milton am indeed a fan of the USA having made many many trips over there in my lifetime and more to come. An amazing country, a culture shock to we Aussies from the moment you land in LA. Enjoying you blogs my friend, all a bit tongue in cheek at times as mine. P.S. wishing your beloved Tony Abbott well but feel he’s now yesterdays man.
So let me get this straight Henry Blofeld, as I must be confused.
Here I was thinking you’re just some sweet guy who got caught up in all that USA propaganda, but now you’re still backing Trump as doing a “damn good job” knowing he has now made it legal to end the lives of bears & bear cubs whilst asleep or even as a newborn in their dens?
Wake-up for GS man & say it isn’t so.
The whole thing’s sick and Trump is a very dangerous man.
SOUTHS:-Sad Cafe
We are just not turning up Bald.
I don’t believe you
Few people do Bald.
I happen to enjoy these bunnies efforts thus far this year…..call it futile if you must ….
Apropos to nuffink or nobody, all this talk of thylacines must have reminded me of this,
Leo, giving ’em heaps.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-04-04/tasmanians-are-dregs-bogans-morons-says-leo-schofield/6370896
He is possibly being a little unkind but “the celebration of mediocrity” and “we are just perfect as we are” sentence appeals . I cant quite put my finger on why?
That’s bit harsh from Leo JB. There’s certainly some interesting types down there but…
I remember Leo going off in his column back in the 90’s at the littering that certain blow-ins were engaging in at one of the eastern suburbs beaches – Bronte I think. ‘Pigs and peasants’ he called them. That’s stuck with me, I thought it was a good line. But it does give you the sense that Leo’s not too accepting of the lower classes.
Oh well found, JB! Tasmanians were glad to see the last of that pompous prat! Used to run the Baroque festival here – receiving big handouts from the government. you know – upmarket, snooty stuff – classy. When they decided to tighten the belt on the handouts to him he got his knickers in a real knot – and chucked a huge hissy fit. It was hilarious. Picked up his bat and left – bagging Tasmanians as bogans – or any derogatory term he could think of. He sort of forgot that he had spent years and years telling the world how wonderful Tasmanians were – including himself of course. The press here had a field day.
Last I heard he wasn’t going down a treat in good old Bris Vegas either.
PS: Yes, we still think we’re perfect as we are! Don’t need the Schofield’s of this world – ta
http://www.themercury.com.au/entertainment/brisbane-baroque-festival-falls-out-of-tune-as-event-that-began-in-hobart-goes-into-liquidation/news-story/446f9a595b3ae835807d598e85541bcb
JB – The Brisbane washup
Brisbane didn’t go much better for Mr Schofield, JB
http://www.themercury.com.au/entertainment/brisbane-baroque-festival-falls-out-of-tune-as-event-that-began-in-hobart-goes-into-liquidation/news-story/446f9a595b3ae835807d598e85541bcb
My goodness. I quite forgot you are a Tasmanian,
The fact remains, in spite of all his shortcomings, as supplied, he got the bit about Tasmanians right.
Sure did JB. We’re perfect as we are!! 🙂
Perfect whats!!
Bogans, JB
Not what you’d expect from my favourite politician Scott Ludlum.https://www.buzzfeed.com/markdistefano/18-c-town?bffbozpol&utm_term=.qhL2nJQoe#.woEDKJ8Zw
Frightening stuff on 18c brought to you from the big house.
As SL said, “Bring on the sweet release of death.”
Good stuff, Bella. My favourite item was Barry O’Sullivan tying himself in knots trying to toe the party line on Sally McManus while simultaneously citing her in support of fighting unjust laws. While comparing his heroic struggle to slightly modify 18C to the entire US civil rights movement (without a trace of irony), he forgot how to say African-American, ummed and ahhed for a while, and then actually said “Negro”. Smooth.
The stupidity of these grandiose claims to be fighting tyranny, Communism or various other unAustralianisms is gobsmacking. In reality, pretty much everyone believes that free speech is vital in a democracy and, aside from a couple of basement-dwelling glibertarians, pretty much everyone accepts that it needs to be regulated to some extent. All we’re really arguing about is how much.
The key point, which fortunately won the day, is that most Australians think 18C gets the balance about right just the way it is. Unfortunately, I doubt that will be the end of it, because it seems to me the real agenda of some 18C-opponents is not free speech, but opposition to any anti-discrimination law at all, and they won’t be appeased by this failed symbolic attempt to tinker around the edges.
I say O’Hagan, old bean, there is great danger that God’s lesser creations will start developing notions of equality if a chap cant give them a good ribbing without having to engage bloody lawyers.
The natural order runs deep. There is a principle in play here old boy.
John, I think the anti-18c crew aren’t aiming for the removal of discrimination laws but are asking to be free to satirise, criticise and draw humour from anyone and everyone, regardless of their race or religion or physical abilities. The old blind guy with a stick and dark glasses was often the source of humour. Maybe they didn’t complain because they didn’t see it. However, most people would know that humour often relies on a target. Most people get that it is based on stereotypes and most get that it is not, for the most part, done maliciously. The ability to laugh at oneself and not take yourself too seriously is key. And as you know Leak’s work was satire, as opposed to stand up comedy.
What the AHRC had turned into was a form of prohibitionist’s and we know how that ends up.
And a lot of this stuff works both ways, but is often not treated, by law, as such. I recall some Iman, or similar, suggesting that western women and the way they dress, encourages rape and that these women are basically meat (or again, similar). That is appalling, and wrong, but a person or part of their religions belief, hence their right to say it, and cop the flack, rather than be summoned before the courts.
But you don’t have a problem with the prohibition on some bloke giving you one behind the ear with a cricket bat, stealing your car or walking up and down your street all day stark bollocky naked singing God Save the Queen.
The idea of 18C is to protect people from overbearing and injurious behaviour directed at them by those who have the wit or simply the inclination to do so ie bullying.
Do you think the recent, much publicised cases were examples of your last paragraph, Jean?
Whats your point? 18C is designed to protect people. A policeman might beat someone over the head with a cricket bat because they looked at him in an odd way. That doesn’t mean we should not have policemen does it?
Now what about prohibitions?
If it’s OK for you to insult someone, is it OK for them to slog you with a degree of force they consider appropriate for satisfaction or should bullies be protected by a prohibition?
i can see why it’s an offence to belt someone over the head with a cricket bat or to steal their belongings, but i have never got the idea that there should be a prohibition on offending or insulting people.
but that may just be my silly notion.
anyway it may not matter, the current HRC has damaged it’s own credibility so much few will take it’s procedures seriously for a fair while.
My point was very clear, so I doubt you missed it. As for your comparing sour lemons with machetes, why not put you to the test? Stand against a wall and i’ll call you all the applicable insults that match with your demographic, or whatever, let’s say a pompous, self absorbed, tedious bore. Ok, you would have heard that before, but someone may come up with something that cuts you to the quick. That may hurt you. You may cry. Compare that with someone smashing your teeth in with a brick, or any other monstrosity. No comparison and you know it. Your silliness appears a repressed admission of defeat.
jack. Why should it be OK for someone to deliberately cause grief or trauma with insults when there is no recourse for the victim?
Of course it is “not okay” to hit someone over the head with a cricket bat even when they’ve earned it, but that is what can and does happen.
Insult and verbal abuse is a form of violence and violence begets violence. Words can be weapons and people react with what weapons they have.
What is not offensive to some is highly offensive to others.
The laws favour the articulate and the cunning.
Milton , living in your privileged little bubble it would never occur to you that insults and put downs could have a longer lasting negative affect on some people than getting their teeth smashed in with a brick. Again you demonstrate your egocentric insensitivity, oblivious to the experiences of others.
Is there any physical equivalence do you think? What if you deeply offended someone and they held you over a parapet by your ankles or held your head under water for a couple of minutes?
Not a scratch or a bruise on you? Would that be OK?
Irrational nonsense with some feather weight, cheap asides thrown in, Jean. You’re talking balls and you know it. I much prefer the rare occasions when you make sense. And talk about bullying, not to me, but some of the stuff you dish out may offend some of the more delicate sensitivities on here. Hypocrite! hehe….
Milton . Your inability to see the world from any perspective other than your own and lack of empathy suggests you have laid waste to your frontal lobe.
I’m only saying “suggests” because it might never have been much of one to start with.
Oh, I don’t know, Jean I’ve empathised with your condition for a good while now. Just a suggestion, but you may tip your toes in the water of thoughts that don’t meet with your adolescent desire to be revolutionary, radical etc. You, and your partner, Dismayed are more conformist than the All Hallows school uniform. I would like to encourage you both to think outside the square, but for starters try thinking inside the square.
Regardless, you two pussies are a riot!
Somebody was arguing here that most Australians did not know what 18c was so ho can they support it?
Amazing, Mr Insider, we hear POTUS Trump has a whopping 27 million Twitter followers! He Tweets we listen, maybe not agree but we listen. Loving Trump, Mr Insider and admire the way he’s opened up the Coal business too. Jobs, jobs, jobs!
Coal jobs were well on the way out before Obama, before AGW, and before renewables, mainly because of automation, and competition from gas. That’s not going to change, and anything Trump does to help coal by removing environmental safeguards will only help gas more.
In any case, in the US there are already more jobs in renewables than in coal, gas and oil combined:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-solar-power-employs-more-people-more-oil-coal-gas-combined-donald-trump-green-energy-fossil-fuels-a7541971.html
Apparently according to a few in the know, the next big growth industry is going to be producing legalized pot.
A couple of companies in the US are going gang busters.
Now let’s start a conspiracy theory.
We don’t like how the “deplorables” vote so let’s keep ’em high so they do not care what’s going on.
We will know the end is near in Australia when it is legalised and voting is made non-compulsory.
Should get rid of Pauline and the rest of the minor parties in a jiffy.
I doubt legalising dope will make much difference. I am appalled at how many of the “deplorables” as you so deplorably call them completely disregard the law and get ripped anyway.
I cant say I really know but I suspect rabid Hanson voters would crawl over broken glass to vote for her.
There is also the risk that newcomers to the now legal practice of smoking marijuana might suddenly reckon Hanson looks and sounds pretty good.
Interesting subject this JS. I recently was provided with some statistics from Colarado. Road deaths where cannabinoids involved up dramatically. Similar road statistics from the counties surrounding the Colarado border. Hospitalisations due to cannabanoid ingestion well up. This stat includes the accidental ingestion by small children. School and colledge drop outs up massively. Crime is up, thought to be because of the movement of a particular social class to Colarado due to its law. There were some other alarming stats which I just don’t have at hand at the moment but can get.
You note I use the term Cannabanoids and not Cannabis. The reason is that in Colarado people have quickly moved from ingesting their drug of choice via smoking to a plethora of other ways which allow for a more potent effect. This is generally based around the commercial distillation of the plant into oil and then selling this commercially. These compounds are very strong and act very differently to the simple old joint. They can be placed in foodstuffs and sold hence the accidental ingestion by small children.
The legalisation of Cannabis in Colarado came via the medicinal marijuana route. It morphed into virtually any doctor would give anyone a script if you asked. Then they decided why not legalise. The same will happen here.
I was a strong advocate for the legalisation of marijuana up until I saw these statistics a few weeks ago. I actually am not so sure now.
The people of Colorado made the decision by referendum. Medical cannabis was in place but it was not a gateway to legalisation per se. The people made the decision. As with alcohol, users must be 21 or older to buy and/or possess. The cultivation and sale is highly regulated, to the point where each plant is bar coded and its yield examined and followed all the way to sale. It has just become a billion dollar industry in Colorado. Australia is a long way from legalising pot but I would think 40 of the US states will legalise between now and 2020.
The stuff I saw showed comprehensively that medical marijuana was in fact the gateway. Yield has nothing to do with it. It is about how it is consumed and in what concentration. Yield is just about profit per plant.
It might be to a point in that people have become better acquainted with its applications but the people of Colorado voted to legalise not for medical applications but for recreational use. Many other states have now followed suit – Nevada, California, Massachusetts, Oregon, Washington. The sky has not fallen in. If you wanted to fret about drugs, you might want to start with the frightening levels of opiate addictions here and in the US which more often than not start with a GP prescription.
You see any numbers on the invidence of teenage schizophrenia?
The accepted science on this is certain adolescents have a genetic propensity to schizophrenia with prolonged marijuana use of high THC content from plants grown hydroponically. The days of the old bush weed are long gone now that marijuana production sits with criminal syndicates. Legalise it, regulate it, tax it and make it available only to those 21 years or older.
Your system JTI still doesn’t ameliorate Dwight’s point. Legal or not people with a predisposition to Schizophrenia are at a high risk of developing the disease if they use cannabis. The way people seem to have decided to ingest the drug since the legalisation in Colorado would only make this worse.
Dwight I will get the presentation I was shown and e-mail it to you.
It’s early days for the data but what we have seen in Colorado is teen use is unchanged, there have been no rises in traffic incidents and overall in the US arrests for marijuana possession have declined. Important here to note across the US there remain more arrests for marijuana possession than for all violent crimes combined. Since 2009, when MM was introduced in Colorado, property crime has declined by 3 per cent and violent crime is down 6 per cent. Important to note also that in your home state, people charged with supply of marijuana, which might merely reflect the amount they have been found with – as little as an ounce of weed – face 20 years in prison because Queensland still has the idiotic Bjelke-Peterson laws on the books which make no distinction between marijuana and hard drugs. There are lots of ways to destroy young lives and in Queensland the state does a much better job of it than some hand wringing about rates of schizophrenia, a condition that was rarely diagnosed in the public health system even as recently as twenty years ago.
The stats I saw showed deaths from road accidents where cannabanoids are involved have increased dramatically.
As you are aware I have always been in the legalisation camp. I am just having second thoughts at the moment after I saw the Colorado stats. Perhaps there needs to be some regulation around in what form it is sold and in what strength. If I can get a hold of the presentation I was shown I am more than happy to send it to you JTI. It appears your stats and the ones I was shown may differ considerably.
As for opioids right across that. We will start hearing lots more about Fentanyl, oxycodone and a plethora of other opiates originating from China. Fentanyl in particular has the potential for disaster and many deaths due to overdose.
Here’s a long read from the Cato Institute which says different. I can show you stats from the Drug Policy Alliance which confirm Cato’s data. I think five years is insufficient for empirical data and no one should drive under the influence of drugs or alcohol but I see no evidence to suggest a dramatic increase in cannabis related traffic incidents. https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa799.pdf
It’s like beer vs spirits. Don’t ingest as much.
Re driving, ok, not a great idea, but I’d rather have pot heads on the road than drunks. At least they’re usually travelling slowly. (But mix the two – baaaaaad).
Or heavy machinery, TV.
Poly-drug use is bad stuff TV.
The Cato figures show suicides in Colarado up. Don’t talk about post mortem drug or alcohol findings in road fatalities. They also only talk about expulsion rates from schools and not drop out rates.
As you said early days.
On the Qld drug laws not sure if that was a shot at me or not. All I can say about that is I’m not a legislator. Also if you think anyone gets 20yrs for supplying cannabis you need to read more on sentencing. Even organised crime figures caught cold trafficking 100’s of kilo’s either escape jail time or get very little.
On schizophrenia I happen to know a bit about the subject due to my personal circumstances. I literally grew up with it constantly around me. It has been diagnosed and treated, at times horribly, for many many decades. The rate of diagnosis has increased in the last 20yrs and some academics opine the increase in diagnosis is virtually in step with the increase in cannabis use. MRI’s show that the area of the brain stimulated during a schizophrenic episode are exactly the same areas effected by persons under the influence of cannabis. some think this is particularly significant.
All I know is that it is a horrible disease which tears the hearts out of the loved ones who live with sufferers and anything we can do to prevent it we should.
Not a shot at you as you’re not a legislator. Premiers from Beattie onwards have had a chance to reform drug laws and all have squibbed it. Like I say, the state finds all sorts of ways to destroy young lives.
Speaking from what I know, marijuana is the elephant in the room in the appalling rate of youth suicide.
I feel the problems experienced in Colorado could be avoided by legislating for the legalisation of marijuana but not just suddenly legalising it, but planning for it with several years of education impressing on the young the risks they will be taking if they use it once it is legalised. Create a situation where there is nothing daring or rebellious about using marijuana, it’s just a dopey thing to do.
At least when the legal stigma is neutralised in my opinion young people will be more likely to seek support if they do have negative reactions.
From my limited understanding the risks from cannabis for those with a predisposition for bi-polar disorder or other mental illnesses that could lead to suicide/self harm is during their adolescent years. The legal age in Colorado is 21. Naturally the legal age is not going to deter those teenagers who can access and are keen on smoking pot. Certainly information and education are good things, but there is no shortage of information now. I also doubt whether the young consider smoking pot as daring and rebellious. Personally I think alcohol is more dangerous to teenagers, yet a lot of parents seem to think it ok for their kids and their mates to drink in their homes (with them providing the grog), arguing it is better than them being out and about. I have no knowledge of parents doing the same with cannabis, and heaven forbid anything else.
Milton a friend of mine who lectures in neuropsychology at one of our sandstone universities described it like this. If a kid has a predisposition to schizophrenia they may never develop the condition without marijuana use. If they do smoke pot the chances of the disease manifesting itself are huge. In her opinion almost certain if the use is regular.
We had to have a long hard talk with our boys from an early age about cannabis use and schizophrenia and seems to have worked as they are all high functioning adults.
I’m not so sure there is much education around Cannabis use and the mental health risks.
So, do you think cannabis should be legalised or decriminalised or not? It if it were what precautions if any would you advise?
Of course there is plenty of information but making better efforts to educate children about the risks and how to be aware of and deal with a negative reaction is of vital importance.
While I agree the alcohol culture has more dangers overall in society I can assure you that there are parents out there who introduce their children to marijuana, (and other illegal substances) and a siege mentality towards legal authority. For reasons they can rationalise to their own satisfaction (they’re dopers or druggies so they can) ), as a means of control in protecting their addiction.
One of the most insidious effects of long term cannabis use is that users undermine their own ability to develop a psychological coping mechanism for dealing with crisis and the capacity for adaption, referring always to the quick temporary oblivion (boozers too), and most will get away with it and die oldish and half blotto.
Disastrously though sometimes the elixir fails and the user is overwhelmed by a crisis (which others might experience as something of no great significance )which can lead to a meltdown sometimes with extremely violent results.
Prohibitions do nothing to prevent such outcomes, but they do cultivate a well organised entrepreneurial criminal class working energetically to recruit new customers.
Not all of the customers will have the means to obtain absurdly overpriced products and will engage in stealing or extortion to feed the habit. Another reason to jail them.
Prohibitions work fine for suppliers, and make lots of employment for jailers, enforcers and lawyers.
Cheers.
The Guv’nor – i’m not in any way negating the link between youth ( 0-18yrsand perhaps in some cases above) use of cannabis and serious mental health issues. I did some temp work in a hospital in medical records and I can attest to the fact that many, certainly most, of the youngsters in the mental wards had a history of pot smoking. Of course that was only a part of the story. I agree it can be a harmful substance, and in particular in the formative years. I think my gist was that legalisation in Colorado is for 21 up; legalisation has never stopped youngsters breaking the law. And I agree, info and education can only be good. We have ads about the dangers of smoking, which takes a while to kill. But ads highlighting (and the ads have to be in the right slots – like kfc) the potential for a 13 yr old smoking pot and completely destroying their whole potential are a good idea.
Re the kids, we’ve always talked to them, treated them as humans with brains. And if they got out of line i’d send them to bed, and if the wife wasn’t looking i’d give them a slap! Thus far, thus good Guv. Fine boys actually – sporty, articulate, sociable, smart and well mannered. Though the 11 yr old still needs a bit of work!!
Good comment JB. We need an adult discussion where we agree it’s coming, we start the education at the same time we start taking the foot off the enforcement accelerator and for gods sake invest money in youth mental health. LOT’S OF IT!!!!!!!
Amen to that.
To me it sounds like you have it covered Milton. I found honesty with kids seems to work. Mind you I would never like to relive the 14yr old period of my boys lives again! They were such pains in the proverbial. 17 is another bad time then at about 21 they seem to come good again.
Commissioner Torquemada isn’t happy:
“Sadly, you can say what you like around the kitchen table at home.”
Guess they’ll be looking to recruit family informants like in the good old days of the Staatssicherheit.
Good idea! More power to the children! A good grounding in “The Art of The Deal” should work wonders for nurturing tomorrow’s entrepreneurs.
Good to see you’re feeling better!
It would be an exceedingly ill-judged remark if she really did say that. However, it’s been quoted that way only in Murdoch papers, and as we know, once NewsCorp gets a grudge going, they’re like a moray. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if she actually said something like, “The caterers tell me we’re out of Riesling, sadly. You can say what you like; around the kitchen table at home we love our Riesling”. So I’ll reserve judgement until such time as it gets reported elsewhere.
Remember, this is the same newspaper that recently reported on the Prior appeal, in which it was trivially argued that it is unlawful under 18C to say or do anything that has the specified effect, under the headline “Unlawful under 18C to ‘say or do anything'”. I kid you not.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/unlawful-under-18c-to-say-or-do-anything-cindy-prior-appeal/news-story/fe66fa27dcb0cab8d9f23515c4d38db6
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/unlawful-under-18c-to-say-or-do-anything-cindy-prior-appeal/news-story/fe66fa27dcb0cab8d9f23515c4d38db6?utm_content=SocialFlow&utm_campaign=EditorialSF&utm_source=TheAustralian&utm_medium=Twitter
Well done John.
I just wish more Murdoch readers had your excellent comprehension skills.
Mr O’Hagan,
I have conducted a simple search of non News Ltd publications and it would appear this is what she said. You really shouldn’t be so reactionary.
Happy to eat my words, Mr Oath, if you can provide a non-NewsCorp-sourced link.
I see Dwight has provided the evidence Mr O’Hagan.
Watch the video and judge for yourself. She did indeed say it: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/gillian-triggs-gets-standing-ovation-at-bob-brown-foundation-fundraiser/news-story/a8366dc8d0e74cebf3f73d294971b8f7
Right you are then, although I note the video is cut abruptly at the sentence in question while she is still speaking, so there remains context missing.
Mind you, I think JB’s comment below is apposite. I don’t think anyone really believes she meant private speech should be regulated; she was clearly noting that the law applied only to public conduct and lamenting the existence of private prejudice. And given that free speech is supposedly the issue here, it is rather ironic that Triggs is subjected to such suffocating scrutiny from NewsCorp for the slightest turn of phrase that could be twisted to conform to the bogeyman image they are bent on manufacturing.
John,
Did you miss her use of the word ‘sadly’……..
Even if she did say that, clearly what he means is that it is a sad thing that people have he prejudices that they do.
To infer that she means it is a sad thing that they are legally able to do so is just plain disingenuous.
Mind you she should have the smarts enough to be very careful to make her statements difficult for her detractors to put their own spin on them. Circling like sharks.
Jillian Triggs has done it again.
“Sadly you can say what you like around the kitchen table at home”.
Oh let’s see, HRC co-ordinated e monitoring via compulsory NBN connection, or a surreptitious wire tap for the unconnected, and dire outcomes for those exposed for saying something, anything naughty.
A standing ovation from Bob’s mates, but of course it wasn’t a fund raiser.
The speaking invitation from Kim must be in the mail already.
Dwight and Lou – I’ve been fairly uninterested in the whole 18c thingy, but that puts Gillian Triggs squarely in my bad books. I think I get what she means but it shows a scary lack of perspective and is a nanny state posture par excellence. I believe she’s a pretty hot lawyer (don’t misinterpret that please – she’s neither pretty nor hot). Maybe she should go back to ambulance chasing or some such pursuit.
She’s now moved into Erich Honecker territory. Anyone now giving her the benefit of the doubt is outing themselves.
well, she won Miss University in 1966, and was a very attractive woman when she taught me crim in the early 80s.
great teacher and a smart lawyer but i am sure she never did anything as low rent as ambulance chasing, more your international law type.
she is simply in a job that she is unsuited for, probably would have made a good judge, but the President of HRC is as much as political job as a legal one, and she has never had the political chops to handle it.
they have made a dog’s breakfast of the thing and just about destroyed the credibility of the organisation and the legislation.
i hasten to add, nothing wrong with a bit of ambulance chasing, did more than ten years as a plaintiff lawyer myself.
Jack, that was a bit of a throwaway post – clearly I’m not up on Prof Triggs appearance and I admit I knew she was an international lawyer. It makes sense that you say she’s in the wrong job; she seems to have made a hash of it, but as I say, I have not followed the story all that closely. Certainly if 18c allows frivolous tripe like the QUT case to get legs, the application of it needs to be considered if not the wording. She seems to have ridden it into the ground. Is there no ‘reasonable person’ test in the legislation?
They just tried to insert “reasonable person” into the legislation. Turns out there aren’t enough reasonable people in the Senate.
I agree Triv. Possibly good lawyer – but in the wrong job.
I’m quite embarrassed that she got a standing ovation in Hobart the other night. Maybe because it was a Greens funding night and they raised $10k. That indeed would be exciting enough for a standing ovation.
Having said that, I like Bob and Paul – a lot. Don’t know what got into them.
But as you say higher up – we’re an interesting lot down here……………:)
Well, the CIA is able to turn your smart TV into a surveillance device. Think she’s been on the phone with them?
Can anybody see a problem here?
Lyon is going to install 1.1 million batteries to provide 100 mwh of backup electricity supply.
SA uses 12,934 gigawh a year or 35.4 gigawatthr a day.
That’s 35,400 megawh a day which translates, assuming uniform consumption, to 24.5 megawatt hrs a minute
So 1.1 million batteries will keep SA going for about 4 minutes.
( there’s 1000 megawatt hrs in 1 giga watt hrs)
Yes, problem seen JS. Are your figures correct?
I think so TV
http://www.aemo.com.au/-/media/Files/Electricity/NEM/Planning_and_Forecasting/SA_Advisory/2016/2016_SAER.pdf page 2 gives the annual usage.
The number of panels etc comes from
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-30/new-solar-project-announced-for-sa-riverland/8400952
The rest is arithmetic which I think is correct.
The mind boggles at 3.4 million solar panels and 1.1 million batteries.
I have no idea what battery technology they are using but I hope they are recyclable.
TV The logic might be wrong though.
4 minute’s warning is enough to get everything done before the power goes out. We don’t muck around here.
Also, great effort by Nathan Lyon. Straight after a grueling tour of India he’s got over a million batteries ready to fire up. Little wonder he’s the GOAT.
I see the Xmen have folded again for virtually nothing. What a waste of time. A cost of $Billions and billions to the budget for no economic gain for 20 years and even then it will amount to a margin of error statistically. The governments own modelling shows this is a waste for No growth, no jobs and no wage increases. It does placate their benefactors a little though, so they will get donations again. Trickle down voodoo ideology again costing the Nation $$$$$$$$$. Ridiculous. This will cost the coalition more than their support of cuts to penalty rates and cuts in real terms to the minimum wage. the coalition have misjudged the Nations dislike of this.
Did you catch the three dumb monkeys Turnbull, Morrison & Cormann’s manic press conference this evening? Did my head in.
I’m embarrased for them & that’s saying something!
One minute I’m kicking back watching the Drum & the next it’s rudely interrupted by what I can only describe as a marathon of malevolent morons whose own white privilege is invisible only to them.
How bloody dare they call a tax CUT for their big corporate mates a “win for families”, following weeks of those same families taking the brunt of this governments gouging.
A win for families? In their dreams with this lying plague of puppets calling the shots.
Bella
Bella, JS mentioned the ‘white male’ phenomenon a few days back. I agree with him. What the hell does the colour of their skin have to do with the issue (and don’t like any of them don’t forget). It’s getting too easy to simply throw ‘white male’ at any decision or situation you don’t like. It’s on par with despising all muslims in fact.
All of us who are white by race have white privilege, which generally means ‘beyond the advantages of most’. We don’t experience racial oppression & if you’re a man, you’re not often concerned about how women have to work that much harder to prove herself in a career.
Men don’t see that because you have the luxury of not noticing just how much advantage you get in a society with access to resources, but it’s not hard to see for those without it.
Don’t take it personally Trivalve, it just is & the cap fits those three dishonest prigs perfectly.
You are quite right Bella, but maybe you should have issued a trigger warning before using the term “white privilege”, as there are some sensitive souls around here! To those who are accustomed to privilege, but not so much to introspection, equality feels like disadvantage.
John Howard Griffin was a writer (among his many other talents) who wasn’t afraid of introspection. For a primer on what it’s like to live without accustomed privilege, even voluntarily, you can’t go past his “Black Like Me”, published over 50 years ago, so we’ve all had plenty of time to think about it):
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/black-like-me-50-years-later-74543463/?all
A good book that, John. I read it high school and recently bought a second hand copy for my eldest boy.
Though i’m pretty sure all the homeless white men, drunks some of them, unemployed or unemployable, feel as keenly their ‘white privilege’.