The content on this webpage contains paid/affiliate links. When you click on any of our affiliate link, we/I may get a small compensation at no cost to you. See our affiliate disclosure for more info -----------------------
Last updated on August 9th, 2017 at 01:01 pm
“That’s the pesky thing about these laws,” wrote David Marr last year. “ … they can be turned against decent white folk.” Dave’s sarcastic take on Victoria’s anti-vilification legislation was slightly misinformed; the “decent white folk” involved in the case to which Marr referred turned out to be decent black folk. In fact, hauling whitey up before any of Australia’s racial vilification shame courts is proving more difficult than anticipated:
An Aboriginal teenager is the first person to be charged under Western Australia’s new racial vilification laws after allegedly calling a 19-year-old a “white slut” …
Speaking to The Australian last night, Ms Blackney said she did not ask for the girl to be charged with racial vilification but it was appropriate such charges had been laid. “I don’t know why they started this racist crap. I wasn’t racist towards them,” Ms Blackney said.
- These laws should not apply to anyone. They are politicising the motives of crimes not punishing the elements that constitute the crime.
A threat is a treat.
An assault is an assault.
They are a violation of the rule of law and are easily corrupted by politics and hysteria.
Although I feel for the victims of racial vilification, they should NOT require a separate offence.
Get Rid of these laws ASAP – they are dangerous in the long term.
While attacking someone because they are politician be a life a sentence, while attacking someone because they are homeless be a $100 fine. Sound Ridiculous, well maybe? But the precedent has been set.
- ‘While attacking someone because they are politician be a life a sentence, while attacking someone because they are homeless be a $100 fine. Sound Ridiculous, well maybe? But the precedent has been set.’
Typo, should read:
Attacking someone because they are a politician, should this motive require a life sentence? While attacking someone because they are homeless, should this only require a $100 fine. Sound Ridiculous, well maybe? But the precedent has been set.
- I think these laws are a bit of a joke as well, but I’m glad to see someone paying attention to the nastyness directed my way.
Being very, very white and very, very blonde I get it a lot, particularly if I decide to go clubbing. Middle Eastern men seem to be fond of calling me a white bitch, cunt, slut, whore, etc when I decline their offer of a roofie cocktail or refuse to go check out their hotted up cars.
Perhaps liberals will stop seeing all white people as evil, baby raping, mother gaia destroying minions of satan. Now if only we could find a way to block out the sun, then I’d be set.
- This is well overdue, gangs of young Aboriginals have been roaming the railway stations and streets and attacking single people. One man recently attacked while waiting for a train , got a hatchet through his head and was lucky to live.
Filthy abuse for no reason is part of their life. The activists and the lefties have a lot to answer for.
- I’ve often found some of the people who complain longest and loudest about racism can be some of the most racist and offensive people you would find…
I know here in WA (and i am sure in other places) you only have to look the wrong way at some “types” and you will get the full book of filthy swear words thrown at you, liberally sprinkled with references to your colour….
when laws such as this came in, i for one thought the one thing u could guarantee is that it will be predominantly the caucasian types that this would be used against…
but to now see this law being implemented evenly is truly gratifying… although it could be used on a daily basis so i dunno how you only pull one person up for an event like this in a whole year….
and good to see even though this sort of language was used, in the process of a physical attack on someone, it gets reduced to a lower charge, and then again coz it involves juveniles…. thats how you introduce a real deterrant… i doubt she’ll even end up having to pick up some litter……
- In Hong Kong, they still quail and rage at Pauline Hanson’s name. An ex student of mine who now studies in Australia wondered if ‘people were racist’ because she had adjustment problems.
In Hong Kong, even my boss refers to me as a ‘Gweilo’, which tranlates as being ‘devil ghost man’. In a recent staff issue, the boss said to me, ‘he has a problem with gweilo’s’. ‘Gweilo’ is a lazy term for people who cant be bothered using a simple word such as foreigner. I wont say that I’m a victim of ‘racism’, far from it, the Hong Kongers have given me more status than they would give to many of their own.
My point is that from my experience, HK people see racism only when it affects them. Racism against Indians, dark-coloured people, domestic helpers et al, would not even be remotely countenanced as being discriminatory or rude in any way. But let Pauline open her mouth and the ‘R’ word is used openly and with indignation.
Face it. Only westerners are racist.
- These laws are a total sham.
Yesterday I heard about 3 radio-hosts on FM radio in Melbourne making fun of Tom Cruise and Scientology.
Sure it was nothing more than amusement and entertainment. But they broke our laws, they made a mockery of someone’s religion. Better arrest them Premier Bracks ! They are a threat to our multicultural harmony !
- Sounds reasonable to me. People should have a right to attend to their daily business without being vilified, regardless of their colour.Posted by gustov_deleft on 2006 06 02 at 01:57 AM • permalink
- Your right Gustov. Fuck off – I don’t care what colour you are.Posted by The (WHMECDM) President on 2006 06 02 at 02:20 AM • permalink
- Good Lord. I find myself in agreement with both darrinh and gustov_deleft.
That is the second most surprising and downright disorientating thing that’s happened to me in the last 13 months.
- Oops, grammar check needed. Should have said
YOU’RE right Gustov. Fuck off – I don’t care what colour you are.
Posted by The (WHMECDM) President on 2006 06 02 at 02:35 AM • permalink
- Actually, this decision stinks of Political Correctness gone mad, the left has created the monster, now it has a life of it’s own. I sense a certain amount of neuronal dysfunction from the left, afterall, it was never intended to be used to prosecute ‘the minority’, I think in days ahead we’ll see the left invoke the ‘minority clause’.
- “Roofies” are the date-rape drug. Can’t recall what the proper name is…
Rohypnol (flunitrazepam).
Posted by walterplinge on 2006 06 02 at 04:37 AM • permalink
- Zoe, I’ve been secretly controlling your mind…..ha ha ha.Posted by gustov_deleft on 2006 06 02 at 05:52 AM • permalink
- It should be obvious that according to the “uber” liberals, minority victim groups cannot be held responsible for the crimes they commit.
In this heirarchy of Victim groups the Pals are at the top of the pile.
Armies of liberal writers will spin, airbrush out, and rewrite at the slightest hint of any attrocity committed by the Pals. Or in the case of public murder of so called “collaborators” they simply do not report anything.
How does a victim group promote itself towards the top of the pile.
Simply by shouting hatred at America and its leadership.
The aboriginals are NEAR the top of the Australian pile , its hard to report their transgressions without being called a racist by every Univesity prof and SMH reporter. But a least you do not do time in Jail.
You can freely insult Christianity or Jesus Christ etc and this is “freedom of expression”. But attack Islam or report that crimes are commited by muslim gangs and you are a racist redneck worthy of prosecution.
Even in Australia muslims have displaced the aborigines at the top of the vistims hierarchy.
- Gustov, you’re pretty brave to praise these laws, considering what you were recently up to in a previous thread.Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 06 02 at 06:45 AM • permalink
- Yeah, I wish I was an Aboriginal, Davo. After all, they clearly enjoy advantages the rest of us don’t, such asunrivaled health and wellbeingPosted by gustov_deleft on 2006 06 02 at 06:56 AM • permalink
- Andrea, I think people should be free to live their lives without being victims of prejudice.Posted by gustov_deleft on 2006 06 02 at 06:59 AM • permalink
- Oh, I forgot, when a leftist calls someone names he isn’t being prejudiced, because a leftist can never be a bigot.Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 06 02 at 07:31 AM • permalink
- The English language is a beautiful thing. There’s a marvellous expression: “Hoist on your own petard.” which is given the definitive treatment by our own gutsy @ #31.
Andrea, I think people should be free to live their lives without being victims of prejudice.
ROFL !
Posted by Stop Continental Drift! on 2006 06 02 at 07:39 AM • permalink
- Cue swift change of topic by gutsy….
—- whooosh——-
Posted by Stop Continental Drift! on 2006 06 02 at 07:40 AM • permalink
- No change of topic. Being intolerant of intolerance is not prejudicing, my wingnut friends.
—-whosh——
Posted by gustov_deleft on 2006 06 02 at 07:51 AM • permalink
Being intolerant of intolerance is not prejudicing, my wingnut friends.
So you support calling out Muslims who support Islamic supremacism?
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 06 02 at 08:26 AM • permalink
- I think it was Samuel Johnson who said that a man should be able to say anything he liked, and another man ought to be free to knock him down for it.
Well, a bit too conducive to brawling, I suppose, but the basic idea is sound. While I believe that people ought to speak civilly to and about each other, passing laws that make it illegal to do otherwise are just a plain bad idea. “We should be intolerant toward intolerance”. That is a sentiment that almost inevitably plays into the hands of those who wish to use one political belief or another as either a vehicle for preferential treatment, or as a weapon to secure power. I agree with the notions expressed by mustus (#2, above): an act of violence should be punished as such, without going into some byzantine and highly selective examination of motives.
- People should have a right to attend to their daily business without being vilified, regardless of their colour.
Depends on what you mean by “right”.
If you mean “oughta be able to, in a just and decent world”, I agree.
If you mean “guaranteed by the state by the use of force”, not so much. Keep your jackboots off my free speech, please.
- If people are not allowed to voice what they think or feel, how can you know how to judge them? I prefer that they say their racist crap out loud. Then I can avoid them, or tell them my opinion of the quality and quantity of their brain. They know where I stand, and I know where they stand. It’s called communication.
Any law that prevents it is an ass.
- Oh, and by the way, I am happy to see that you Australians still know how to have a really good time.
Being intolerant of intolerance is not prejudicing, my wingnut friends. -#36
“I’m sure we all agree that we ought to love one another and I know there are people in the world that do not love their fellow human beings and I hate people like that!” –Tom Lehrer
Posted by Old Grouch on 2006 06 02 at 11:41 AM • permalink
- Paco man…BTW, before it slips my mind and it may, drinking Sour Apple Martini’s, that Bluto/Spinach shot, was the funniest and best dig I’ve seen in a long damn time.
Well, Yale University has apparently done some “stupid” profiling, and has denied Juan Cole a teaching position
Yale, already has Sayed Rahmatullah Hashemi, a ‘former’ foreign ministry official of the Taliban government, enrolled as a student, of course.
What would Juan teach a headlopping anti- Semite?
Yo, Dave S.
How’s the Moose, treatin’ ya’?
I almost hit one of the bastards (I assume you mean real, live Maine moose.) Three o’clock in the morning, I’m in the center lane on the Turnpike, it’s a bit misty, I pass him standing in the left lane. Missed him by about two feet. The bottom of his belly was almost to the height of my roof. If I’d hit him, that would have been 1000 pounds of moose through my windshield at 65 mph. Bye, bye Dave.
When I got home I pulled upholstery out of my anus for an hour.
- gutsy @ #31:
Andrea, I think people should be free to live their lives without being victims of prejudice.I guess you are still working up that apology to darrinh, eh gutsy? Getting the grovelling just right? Waiting for the max audience?
Author! Author!
Posted by Stop Continental Drift! on 2006 06 02 at 07:34 PM • permalink
- I think people should be free to live their lives without being victims of prejudice
These so-called victims of prejudice would help their cause if they refrained from pretending to be victims of prejudice when they aren’t. Or doing things that ordinary people hold in contempt.
When a prat hasn’t got decent argument the first thing he does is show the “I’m a victim of prejudice card”. Pathetic, but the Left falls for it every time. No wonder they keep on doing it.
Posted by walterplinge on 2006 06 02 at 09:22 PM • permalink
- The Victorian govt left got their ridiculous ‘anti-hate’, ‘vilification’laws passed. [thought laws] They caused convictions to two Christian pastors [at least one non-white] who not only know Islam personally but merely quoted some of its injunctions against other religions while, in a local church conference attended by Islamic agitators for the purpose of applying the law.
The conferees were also told as Christians to ‘love Moslems’.
The outcry was great, even among the Labor governments who have passed no such laws. What happened?
The Vics *confirmed* their oppressive and unworkable laws, rather than change them and pursued the case further on appeal.The only conclusion possible is that the left hates Christian freedom of speech and favours Islamic censorship.
- Victimhood is a necessary correlate to collectivism. If we are all going to live for all, there must be some kind of standard for allocating the sacrifices. There must be victims, else what would the do-gooders do? They would have a terrible time displaying their good, moral selves if they didn’t have victims to tend to. If there aren’t enough, and capitalism tends to produce fewer and fewer actual candidates, you create some.
You haven’t lived until someone has attempted to make you a mule to carry the burden of their virtue.
Laws against words are laws censoring thought. When you demand that they be used equally across the board, you are demanding that every one be under the thought control of everyone else. They use the term “hate” as a screen to hide the fact that they you putting a vise around your mind. If you doubt it, just look at what is called hate speech these days on any university campus.
- 46 Dave S “That’s why Naziism was pure evil (20,000,000 liquidated) while Communism ‘hasn’t yet been implemented properly’ (80,000,000 liquidated.)”
Funny too how the most vicious right wing hate figure the left can find is the Nazis. Nazi, of course, being short for the German for National Socialists. Yes, Socialists, you dip-shit lefties. That’s you! Want more? Here’s Paul Johnson in his book ‘Modern Times’, “There is no evidence that Hitler was, even to the smallest degree, influenced by big business philosophy…He regarded himself as a socialist, and the essence of his socialism was that every individual or group in the state should unhesitatingly work for national policy… German socialism, [Hitler said], ‘…does not change the external order of things, it orders solely the relationship of man to the state…Why should we need to socialize the banks and factories? We are socializing the people.’”
- #29 I wish you were an aboriginal too Gusty cos you would not be able to speak English as your first language,lefties like you would banish you to the desert to live in a corrugated iron humpy,perpetrate shocking violence on your female family members and others and cause you untold health problems from being hit over the head with a bottle or sniffing petrol.Walk a mile in these people’s shoes and see whether apartheid is a good idea for them.
- Yeah- both Christian pastors who are being persecuted by the Bracks Labor govt are NOT white Aussies- Pastor Daniel Scot is a Pakistani Christian. And he was one of the first victims of Pakistan’s notorious blasphemy laws when in 1986 he was charged with insulting the Islamic prophet Muhammad, which under Section 295-C of the Pakistan Penal Code carries a death sentence. Scot had been threatened by the council of the college in Okara, Pakistan, where he worked, that a charge would be brought against him unless he converted to Islam. The charge was brought after he refused to do so and explained his belief that his spiritual salvation could come only from Jesus Christ, and not Muhammad. He was forced to flee to Australia with his family to escape the threat of Islamic extremists who have since murdered four Christians accused of blasphemy in Pakistan.Posted by Wylie Wilde on 2006 06 03 at 12:44 PM • permalink
Funny too how the most vicious right wing hate figure the left can find is the Nazis. Nazi, of course, being short for the German for National Socialists. Yes, Socialists, you dip-shit lefties. That’s you!
Thank you for the reminder, Ritchie. Yes, I fell into the lazy trap of thinking of them as extreme rightists.
- sundaymail
The case has sparked outrage among some Aboriginal leaders, who say the charge is not in keeping with the intent of the new racial vilification laws.
“When we said we wanted race-hate laws, we meant get whitey, not this!”
- #58
True Barrie, but it had another very good imapct. NSW, QLD,and WA were considering similar legislation. The they saw the open, blatant set-up the Islamic Council of Victoria perpetrated on the Two Danny’s, and ran a mile.
Is the Victorian thought crime legislation appalling (but the left loves it) – YES. But at least we now will not have similar thought crime legislation anywhere else in Asutralia. That black could at least has some silver lining.
BTW, have the Two Danny’s been imprisoned for thought crimes yet?
MarkL
Canberra
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
I let him ramble on until he got it out of his system, which fortunately didn’t take long. Should I have reported the incident? Perhaps. It didn’t seem worth the trouble at the time. Nowadays I probably would, just as I would undoubtedly be if I used the same language to anyone black or white. The traffic has to go both ways on this.