open24hours posted:

quote:

“This is political correctness gone mad, I encourage anyone who wants to wear their Aussie flag shorts, green and gold caps and their thongs to head down to Freo on Australia Day and celebrate our national day. Just because the council doesn’t want to, doesn’t mean we can’t.

open24hours posted:

Spending your career working on and learning about things actually makes you less qualified to talk about them.

Nautilus42 posted:

Can you post this before tomorrow? There's a lot of interested groups rallying together because of this.

QUACKTASTIC posted:

Amazing

Tokamak posted:

All Jews look the same, so it's an easy mistake to make

RUBBISH LMAO posted:

Chief Rabbi Freundel issues urgent statement on tzniut

Chief Rabbi of the Glen Eira region, Rabbi Barry Freundel, has made a statement condemning the modern degradation of values. 'Promiscuity is clearly a product of an increasingly smutty world in which skirts short enough to show privates, or even naked dipping in water has become acceptable! Such abdications of tzniut (modesty) have serious consequences, particularly for the men whom they force to sin.'

ewe2 posted:

Cultural war astroturfing, the more things change the more they stay the same. The reason it works is, as we've found, that post-facts are things no one gives a poo poo about. Giving a poo poo about them then marks you as being On The Other Side, and in this way racists and authoritarians hope to muddle the argument their way, cf. the infamous Protocols, which reads today like a neolibertarian laundry list. Who can deliver the resounding blow, is Mediawatch the right vehicle? Do we have nothing better than Snopes these days?

hooman posted:

So recoombe do you want to send mediawatch the tip?

This seems super bizarre, especially when you read their news section and it's disavowing the right wing guy who was lieing about not being able to get security. The whole thing is really weird.

quote:

In 1947, when I was just three years old a doctor removed my clitoris. Female genital mutilation is mostly associated with African cultures, and non-Christian religions, but my FGM happened in white, midwest America. It took place in a church clinic that used a scalpel on girls who masturbated.

Jonah Galtberg posted:

1932

gay picnic defence posted:

The protest in Parliament House last week was another opportunity to reflect on the narcissism so prevalent among, but not restricted to, the left.

Bathing themselves in self righteousness they justify their behaviour by kidding themselves that they have the right to rearrange their rights and obligations according to their own assessment of what is fair and appropriate.

Perhaps it doesn't occur to them that if everyone did that there would be anarchy. Maybe they think that wouldn't be a bad thing. It's the self centredness that really aggravates.

What would they say if their employer sought to rearrange their rights to salary or super because the employer decided it was fair and reasonable to pay less effective workers less ? No doubt there'd be an uproar. What if their university just decided to not award a degree on the basis of some subjective personal bias by one lecturer? Another uproar.

Fair enough because we have rules so that we can all manage to live together. The employer and the university should have to live by the rules. And so it is for this lot of attention seekers.

Peaceful protest is a good thing. It is in many ways a cornerstone of our democracy. We all have the right to express our views freely. It doesn't do any good to just express your views in the privacy of your own home. The great conversation of life that we call democracy is predicated on the sharing of ideas, listening to new ones, ones with which we disagree and even,maybe, changing our mind.

Whether it's a solitary discontent walking the streets carrying a sandwich board extolling the merits of his view, however ridiculous, or a large co-ordinated group determined to share their collective view matters little. They equally share the right to protest. That right does not however give them the right to break the law.

Nor should that right in my view be exercised in a way that inhibits the rights of others.

When I left school I went to work for the then Myer group to train to be a buyer. The "old school" mentors found it imperative to make sure every trainee knew just exactly how low they were on the pecking order. Mine chose to get me to walk a few blocks each day to pick up the uniforms that had been made to measure in a nearby factory and carry them back to the store.

After a fairly short distance the nylon string binding the bundles of uniforms together would dig uncomfortably into my hands. The sensible option of putting them on a delivery truck that passed the factory daily was rejected under the ridiculous assertion that it would make customers wait another day.

The test was clear: complaining wasn't an option. On a particularly difficult day with a big load in hand the road to return was blocked by a sizeable anti-Vietnam War demonstration. I couldn't put my load down, they weren't packed to sit on the pavement.

I saw a bunch of students, all well fed, looking as though they were having a good day out. I couldn't help but dislike every one of them. In their rightful desire to express their views they had forgotten to take into account the rights of others or more likely decided their own right took precedence.

I realised there were hundreds of people like me about whom this group didn't give a drat. There might have been people trying to get to the doctor, to pick up a kid at school or to get to the bank (in pre-ATM days) to be able to pay their rent. We just didn't matter to the students.

And so it is with the protesters at Parliament House. They think their right to protest means they can do as they choose. They choose what will give them publicity. The fact that Parliament is interrupted, that security staff are called to action with all the risks that entails, that inconvenience is caused to other people is just irrelevant to them.

Equally irrelevant to them is the much broader policy issue, namely the horrific problems caused when criminals offer to help people by pass both the UNHCR and local laws in exchange for cash.

Those without the cash just get dumped on the forgotten pile. No one was protesting for them. They're not here, they're not in the news. Those with money to pay who got within reach merely provide the backdrop against which this lot act out their drama. It's the politics of proximity. It costs so little, feels so good.

As with so many people who are motivated to put themselves centre stage in protests we discover that the real issue for them is not the subject of their protestations but in fact themselves. They want to be on TV, they want to tell everyone that they care. It's just one big "I'm a nice person" story.

The subjects of their protestations in fact are an indispensable asset without whom they would lack a vehicle or springboard to promote themselves as caring people. It's narcissism of the highest order. These people may well believe deeply what they are saying.

They just believe more deeply that we all need to know how much they care. If they really want change they will have to put in the hard yards, build support among others for their views, listen to other points of view, negotiate and find common ground. But that will not happen. The democratic process is too much hard work for them. They don't care about civilised discourse, your view or mine. It's all about them. It's "the look at me" politics of narcissists.

Solemn Sloth posted:

the regressive left have always been narcissistic and self-absorbed, don't they realise that their anti-war protest is slowing me down, and I am carrying a parcel!

"as with so many people who want to put themselves centre stage" writes former politician, ambassador to the holy see, and newspaper columnist amanda vanstone.

QUACKTASTIC posted:

Yeah but what about my brief inconvenience

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2016/s4587508.htm

QUACKTASTIC posted:

Have they considered that maybe it's their message not their messaging that's poo poo?

WhiskeyWhiskers posted:

RiseUp is the nationalist group.

TheMightyHandful posted:

18C defendant TOTALLY not racist

A Facebook account using the name “Calum Thwaites” and also bearing the image of the student at the centre of a national racial discrimination controversy has been used to post a comment in a secret anti-Aboriginal Facebook group, suggesting someone use the word “niggers”.

Phoneposting, so won't c&p the lot

Byolante posted:

Except there is no evidence he is a racist

Nam Taf posted:

No it's not, it's just denoting that he doesn't think Buzzfeed is legitimate journalism. It's the same as Maybe there's another context to it but I've personally used multiple quotes to denote airquotes since before SA had an airquote smiley and certainly before the alt-right were a thing. How long has it had this other context?


It's not. The Buzzfeed article is atrociously full of poo poo and fictional. It's not some racist/alt-right hideout. It's not some anti-aboriginal page. It's a meme and shitposting group started by some guy named Brock after he was banned from the QUT SS group for constantly posting about sports in all-caps. It predates the whole 18C saga by a number of months and the only relation is that it has a significant overlap with the QUT crowd. It's apolitical and pretty centralist, if not slightly left leaning, simply by virtue of that being the political distribution of uni students and young adults. It's no more racist than all of SA is because occasionally FYAD posts poo poo like that.

I've no idea if that's actually Calum or if it's a fake account (there's multiple on there). The post got (rightly) called out later in the thread. Regardless, because the place was conceived as a place where anyone can post anything off-topic (in that it's just full of shitposting about anything and everything), the admins try to avoid deleting anything where possible as a rule and instead tell people to block those they don't like.

Either way, if it's actually Calum he's a tremendous idiot for thinking he should say that even possibly as a joke. If it's not him, whoever it is will gently caress him over something chronic in his ongoing lawsuits and they're a dickhead for it.

open24hours posted:

Are there any examples of triple quotes being used in that way? I've only ever heard about the parentheses.

Nam Taf posted:

As I said, because he wanted to use it as airquotes because he thinks Buzzfeed are hacks and calling them journalists is an abuse of the word 'journalist'.

Literally just read it as journalist and you have his intended meaning. I am sure he's as oblivious to this alternate meaning as I was until reading auspol this morning.

Nam Taf posted:

Jobs and Growth, Mr Speaker

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-07/economic-growth-gdp-data-abs/8099480

ewe2 posted:

Hey guys, I know the answer, it's PRIVATE TUITION!

Yes! with the liberal application of Private Tuition™ you too can have a shining example of Best Practice™!

_{poor families need not bother}

open24hours posted:

I still don't know how I feel about this. A local publishing industry does seem like something worth preserving though, especially when you can import anything you want for personal use.

open24hours posted:

I'm not sure that's not a problem with universities rather than publishers, although I'm sure there's some reason why students just absolutely have to spend hundreds on text books every semester that I'm not aware of.

Milky Moor posted:

Indigenous person says something you don't agree with, call him retarded.

quote:

Pearson said DI [Direct Instruction] – which has been criticised by some educators as a rigid, expensive and culturally inappropriate remedial curriculum – was “precisely the approach to schooling that removes all excuses” based on a student’s disadvantage.
Noel Pearson at odds with government over Queensland schools
Read more

“The operating principle of Direct Instruction is: ‘If the student has not learned, the teacher has not taught’,” he said.

hooman posted:

"Controversial conservative politicians Cory Bernardi and George Christensen have agreed to help an anti-Islam organisation raise funds to defend a defamation case brought by a halal certifier.

The South Australian senator and Queensland MP, who are both outspoken critics of Islam and halal certification, are on the bill for a series of events by the Q Society, the Australian reported."

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/dec/09/cory-bernardi-and-george-christensen-to-raise-funds-for-anti-islam-group

loving hell Libs, get your loving morons under control.

Bernardi, Christensen fight for anti-Islam society posted:

The Coalition’s self-styled conservative warriors Cory Bernardi and George Christensen will ­appear at a fundraising dinner to help an anti-Islam organisation and three members of a rival ­political party defend themselves in defamation ­proceedings.

Senator Bernardi said he agreed to speak at the Q Society fundraiser after he was ­approached by Kirralie Smith, the Australian Liberty Alliance’s lead Senate candidate for NSW at this year’s federal election and one of the respondents to a defamation lawsuit bought by Halal meat certifier Mohamed El-Mouelhy.

“I am more than happy to ­assist in raising money to fund the legal defence of a friend against Mohamed El-Mouelhy,’’ Senator Bernardi said.

“Kirralie Smith is a personal friend and when asked to lend support, a true friend always steps up to do what they can.’’

Senator Bernardi last year ­delivered a 10-minute speech to the Senate under parliamentary privilege in which he described Mr El-Mouelhy as a liar and his business activities as corrupt.

Mr Christensen said Ms Smith had been “victimised’’ over her scrutiny of the Halal certification industry.

Speaking from the US, Mr El- Mouelhy was nonplussed by the fundraiser line-up: “They can do what the hell they like — they are ­losing the case anyway.’’

The case, which has been set down for a five-week jury trial in the NSW Supreme Court in March, centres on two videos narrated by Ms Smith and published by the Q Society.

Mr El-Mouelhy claims the videos carry the imputations that he is corrupt, dishonest, funds terrorism and is party to a global Islamic plot to destroy Australian values.

The Q Society and three of its officeholders are named alongside Ms Smith as respondents. The office holders named in the lawsuit include alliance president and West Australian Senate candidate Debbie Robinson and secretary Ralph Schumann.

The Q Society is holding dinners in Sydney and Melbourne to raise funds to ­defend the claim and prosecute a cross-claim against Mr El-Mouelhy for calling them bigoted and racist in ­social media posts.

Legal fees and court costs are expected to top $1 million.

The line-up at the dinners is an eclectic mix of conservative figures.

In Sydney, alliance candidate Angry Anderson will be joined by fringe cartoonist Larry Pickering and former Liberal Party MP Ross Cameron. In Melbourne, senators Bernardi and Christensen will share the stage with pastor Mark Durie.

The funds are to be directed to the ­Q Society and its legal ­defence, and will not benefit the alliance.

MysticalMachineGun posted: