 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
David 
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: Abbott to the ABC: "Whose side are you on?" |  |
|
The "freedom of speech" party continues to stay true to their principles. This time, they're bullying the public broadcaster for allowing an undesirable to exercise his free speech.
Sam De Brito offers an excellent argument against this nonsense:
http://www.theage.com.au/comment/the-abc-wasnt-wrong-to-have-zaky-mallah-on-qa-20150623-ghvaow.html
It strikes me, though, how well this all plays into Abbott's hands. He's essentially created a moral panic out of nothing (that is, a war on the other side of the world that has little if anything to do with our nation's interests). By putting this conflict at the centre of his government's missions, he's managed to stir up both Islamophobic and Islamic extremist sentiment and increased his government's authority through legislation, which leads to our public discussions revolving around terrorism, which leads to exchanges like we saw on Q&A, which in turn gives Abbott another opportunity to look tough on national security (and his favourite target, the ABC). It's the gift that keeps on giving.
Has anyone else stopped to think that, without this confected terrorist threat and everything that flows from it, Abbott would have nothing? He and his government would just be seen as the economic incompetents with a weird '50s fetish that they are. They've played this very well.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
 |
partypie
Joined: 01 Oct 2010
|
| Post subject: Re: Abbott to the ABC: "Whose side are you on?" | |
|
| David wrote: | The "freedom of speech" party continues to stay true to their principles. This time, they're bullying the public broadcaster for allowing an undesirable to exercise his free speech.
Sam De Brito offers an excellent argument against this nonsense:
http://www.theage.com.au/comment/the-abc-wasnt-wrong-to-have-zaky-mallah-on-qa-20150623-ghvaow.html
It strikes me, though, how well this all plays into Abbott's hands. He's essentially created a moral panic out of nothing (that is, a war on the other side of the world that has little if anything to do with our nation's interests). By putting this conflict at the centre of his government's missions, he's managed to stir up both Islamophobic and Islamic extremist sentiment and increased his government's authority through legislation, which leads to our public discussions revolving around terrorism, which leads to exchanges like we saw on Q&A, which in turn gives Abbott another opportunity to look tough on national security (and his favourite target, the ABC). It's the gift that keeps on giving.
Has anyone else stopped to think that, without this confected terrorist threat and everything that flows from it, Abbott would have nothing? He and his government would just be seen as the economic incompetents with a weird '50s fetish that they are. They've played this very well. |
And people reckoned Gillard was a whiner when she had a crack over perceived misogyny |
|
|
|
|
partypie
Joined: 01 Oct 2010
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| PS I cracked up at Abbott's response the other day in response to the Popes plea to care for the environment. |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully 
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The producers of Q & A handed The Mad Misogynist Monk a free kick.
The ABC TV programme manager through the showing & timing of the Killing further handed the Libs several free kicks.
Geez the ABC are biased 
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
Tannin 
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| watt price tully wrote: | | Geez the ABC are biased |
Correct. They are terrified of getting even more savage cuts, and Abbott knows it. He's walking all over them.
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
John Wren 
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
| Post subject: Re: Abbott to the ABC: "Whose side are you on?" | |
|
| David wrote: | The "freedom of speech" party continues to stay true to their principles. This time, they're bullying the public broadcaster for allowing an undesirable to exercise his free speech.
Sam De Brito offers an excellent argument against this nonsense:
http://www.theage.com.au/comment/the-abc-wasnt-wrong-to-have-zaky-mallah-on-qa-20150623-ghvaow.html
It strikes me, though, how well this all plays into Abbott's hands. He's essentially created a moral panic out of nothing (that is, a war on the other side of the world that has little if anything to do with our nation's interests). By putting this conflict at the centre of his government's missions, he's managed to stir up both Islamophobic and Islamic extremist sentiment and increased his government's authority through legislation, which leads to our public discussions revolving around terrorism, which leads to exchanges like we saw on Q&A, which in turn gives Abbott another opportunity to look tough on national security (and his favourite target, the ABC). It's the gift that keeps on giving.
Has anyone else stopped to think that, without this confected terrorist threat and everything that flows from it, Abbott would have nothing? He and his government would just be seen as the economic incompetents with a weird '50s fetish that they are. They've played this very well. |
other than incompetence, how else are they meant to create an environment of fear?
wag the dog.
_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
Culprit 
Joined: 06 Feb 2003
Location: Port Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Whilst I treat that idiot with disdain and I don't mean Abbott. The last time I looked we were a democracy. The crap that QA and the ABC are left leaning is hilarious. They are only left leaning is they allow a different point of view other than the Government. What the Government is basically saying is, only our view or we will cut you off. |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Excellent short article on this published today, well worth reading:
| Sam de Brito wrote: | It would be heartwarming watching Q&A unite both sides of politics, save for the fact such unity is only to denounce unpopular opinions.
One week, the small "l" liberal left are fizzing about Fred Nile being part of a panel on queer issues, the next week it's the big "l" Liberal right vapouring about a Muslim radical saying it's understandable his bros would wanna join ISIS.
You don't have to agree with either man to see how oceanically silly it is to get upset about other people's opinions on a TV show designed to encourage them to express those opinions.
Then again, I get the feeling both sides of politics would like to see Q&A stocked with polite minorities, accommodating women and a couple of ageing comedians who all agree with each other.
Oh wait, The Project already's done that.
What's far more disturbing than the predictable outrage every Tuesday morning, is how large sections of Australia seem to flirt with the idea people like Nile or Zaky Mallah should be silenced.
This is not to say trickheads like either of these men should be given their own syndicated radio show, but is Australia's moral psychology really so fragile it can't resist the occasional late-night cameo from the fringes of pluralist society?
Will our moral compass spin like the completely respectable roulette wheels in a Packer casino, if we pause to consider that not everyone, everywhere agrees with us?
Steve Pinker, in his book The Angels of our Better Nature, addresses the concept of heresy in silencing opponents. Though he was talking about matters of faith, his words still resonate when it comes to politics and culture.
"When people organise their lives around these beliefs, and then learn of other people who seem to be doing just fine without them ... they are in danger of looking like fools.
"Since one cannot defend a belief based on faith by persuading sceptics it is true, the faithful are apt to react to unbelief with rage, and may try to eliminate that affront," writes Pinker.
This is the nasty grain of truth in the black pearl of liberal censorship; heretics are simply people who don't agree with you.
Keep in mind, many who find it threatening, even seditious, to hear the thoughts of Fred Nile and Zaky Mallah, are the same ones who earlier this year fell over themselves to "express solidarity" with the French satirical magazine, Charlie Hebdo, and upholding the concept of free speech.
The left almost respected our Prime Minister for a second when he committed himself to these principles, yet in their next breath demanded his government deny a visa to an anti-vaccine activist, then a sexist Christian preacher.
Add to them the thought crimes of deported pick-up artist Julian Blanc, another Muslim with the temerity to raise the "Dangerous Idea" of Honour Killings and we seem to have slipped back to the time of Calvin - he who so successfully argued - "we muzzle dogs, and shall we leave men free to open their mouths as they please?"
I applaud the ABC for continuing to expose the Australian psyche to unpopular and dangerous opinions. The only thing they got wrong Monday night was Tony Jones's cringe-worthy apology that someone actually said something unpalatable.
As a country we shouldn't fear people saying things that offend, horrify or disgust us.
To paraphrase a more eloquent man than I: Let truth and falsehood grapple. Truth is strong. |
- http://www.theage.com.au/comment/the-abc-wasnt-wrong-to-have-zaky-mallah-on-qa-20150623-ghvaow.html
Pretty difficult to disagree with any of that.
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Oh, that was already linked to, I see. No matter: it's worth having it quoted here in full.
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
Wokko 
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The ABC is certainly leftist, and by that I mean the new inner city trendy left rather than manning the picket line for a pay rise left. Too many times I've seen a token Conservative or Right voice be outnumbered 3 or 4 to 1 on ABC panel shows.
http://newsweekly.com.au/article.php?id=5595
That said there is no reason to kick up a stink because some random guy asked a question. There ARE people in the community who sympathise with ISIS, terrorism, militant Islam etc. Why shouldn't we see those people exist and answer them rationally and logically? Better than having them hide in the suburbs. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Oh dear Wokko, you really need to learn how to vet your sources and be a bit more intelligent in the way you simply accept anything that seems to confirm your views. This is "evidence" from a "survey" so biased that it claims News Ltd writers support Labor! over the Liberals by almost a 2 to 1 majority.
It is in fact a publication of the notorious anti-democratic ultra-right, ultra-conservative National Civic Council - yes, the very same mob that BA Santamaria led for many years, so it shouldn't surprise anyone to see it spouting the same ridiculous bullshit Santamaria has always stood for.
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
Culprit
Joined: 06 Feb 2003
Location: Port Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Did Big Ears have a crack at Channel 10? Because that piece of shit was on there as well. |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Here is another little gem from the same hysterical hard-right source:
| Quote: | | One way to kill a person is to aim a gun at his head and pull the trigger. Another way is to sneakily administer slow-working poison, the results of which will be exactly the same..... That is exactly what has happened with the Boy Scouts of America [which] voted to allow openly homosexual Scouts. It did, however, keep a ban on homosexual Scout leaders. |
You got it: not expelling all teenage gays from the Scouts is "exactly the same" as and just as horrible as murder. Good source, Wokko. Not.
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: Re: Abbott to the ABC: "Whose side are you on?" | |
|
| John Wren wrote: | | David wrote: | The "freedom of speech" party continues to stay true to their principles. This time, they're bullying the public broadcaster for allowing an undesirable to exercise his free speech.
Sam De Brito offers an excellent argument against this nonsense:
http://www.theage.com.au/comment/the-abc-wasnt-wrong-to-have-zaky-mallah-on-qa-20150623-ghvaow.html
It strikes me, though, how well this all plays into Abbott's hands. He's essentially created a moral panic out of nothing (that is, a war on the other side of the world that has little if anything to do with our nation's interests). By putting this conflict at the centre of his government's missions, he's managed to stir up both Islamophobic and Islamic extremist sentiment and increased his government's authority through legislation, which leads to our public discussions revolving around terrorism, which leads to exchanges like we saw on Q&A, which in turn gives Abbott another opportunity to look tough on national security (and his favourite target, the ABC). It's the gift that keeps on giving.
Has anyone else stopped to think that, without this confected terrorist threat and everything that flows from it, Abbott would have nothing? He and his government would just be seen as the economic incompetents with a weird '50s fetish that they are. They've played this very well. |
other than incompetence, how else are they meant to create an environment of fear?
wag the dog. |
Who's afraid? What panic  
talk about overestimating impact.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
